FLORENCE, Ariz. — Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu built a reputation as a rising, conservative star by taking a hardline stance against illegal immigration, attacking the Obama administration and appearing alongside Sen. John McCain in a 2010 re-election ad in which McCain urged federal officials to just “complete the danged fence.”
But, on Saturday, Babeu’s conservative image took a beating as he was forced to admit publicly that he is gay and was involved in a relationship with a Mexican immigrant who claims the sheriff threatened to have him deported if he revealed their relationship.
Babeu denies any wrongdoing, and has vowed to continue his battle for the GOP nomination in an extremely conservative rural congressional district. He recognizes he is fighting an uphill battle, especially in a state where family values, as defined by a large evangelical Christian and Mormon population, often battle fierce, anti-immigrant beliefs to define conservatism.
At a lengthy press conference, Babeu said he hopes voters will overlook his personal lifestyle and stick with him.
His competitors think voters will reject him, with Arizona Sen. Ron Gould saying he’s sure to lose major support among the family-values voters who oppose gay marriage.
Babeu previously avoided a public stance on gay rights, but came out in favor them on Saturday.
“I can be a supporter and get out there and help articulate as we progress as a culture and a society, that there should be individual liberties and there should be individual freedoms,” Babeu said. “For any other person to define somebody else’s relationship and say it not OK, that is not who we are as Americans.”
Saturday’s revelation already forced Babeu to call presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s staff to say he would step down from his post as state campaign co-chair. Some political observers think his career could be over.
“There is no question that his budding congressional campaign is over,” longtime Arizona Republican political consultant Sean Noble wrote on his blog. “Because it is a Republican primary in a conservative district, it’s likely that the thing that hurts him the most is that he was in a gay relationship.”
Others aren’t sure it’s the end, but they said there’s no doubt he will be hurt.
“It obviously has implications for a congressional race. There’s just no question about it,” said Bruce Merrill, an Arizona State University political science professor emeritus and a longtime pollster. “I don’t see how any reasonable person cannot think that this is going to hurt him, particularly with the constituency that he has built, which is a very evangelical, right-wing, family oriented conservative constituency.”
Babeu’s admission that he is gay came after a story in the Phoenix New Times, an alternative weekly magazine, that quoted a former lover as saying Babeu threatened his immigration status if he revealed their relationship.
Babeu denied claims he tried to threaten the man, a Mexican immigrant and a former campaign volunteer. He said the accusations were an attempt to hurt his political career. The legal status of the man, identified only as Jose by the New Times and Babeu, was unclear. His lawyer said he was unavailable for comment but might be available in a few days.
Jose provided the New Times with photos of him and Babeu embracing. It also posted a cellphone self-portrait of a smiling Babeu in his underwear and another of what appears to be the shirtless sheriff in a bathroom, posted on a gay dating website. Babeu didn’t deny their authenticity.
Babeu made national headlines soon after his 2008 defeat of an incumbent in his rural county south of Phoenix by jumping on the anti-illegal immigration bandwagon led by longtime Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and berating the federal government for allowing human and drug smuggling to go unchecked.
Then in 2010, he was tapped by McCain to help champion his border security plan during McCain’s re-election effort.
McCain, asked Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” about Babeu, said he thought of him as a friend.
“I do not know the details, except what has been published in the media,” he said. “And I’m sure there will be a thorough and complete investigation, if there is any allegation of wrongdoing. All I can say is that he also deserves the benefit, as every citizen does, of innocence until proven guilty. But I appreciate the support that he gave me in my campaign and always will.
Arpaio, a longtime ally, distanced himself.
“All I can say is he’s the sheriff of Pinal County, and it’s up to him to face his issues, not me,” Arpaio told The Arizona Republic. He said Babeu has been “begging” for an endorsement in the congressional primary.
“I don’t even think I’m going to get involved,” Arpaio said. “We’ll see what happens with Babeu.”
Just last weekend, Babeu gave a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C., reiterating his criticism of Obama, the Justice Department’s failed “Operation Fast and Furious” gunrunning investigation and seeking support for his congressional campaign.
Babeu has been something of an enigma since he appeared on the scene. He was elected to the city council of his hometown of North Adams, Mass., at age 18, and came to Arizona shortly after losing an election for North Adams mayor in 2001.
He became a Chandler police officer and in November 2008 defeated a Democratic incumbent to become sheriff.
Along the way, he served in the Army National Guard as both an enlisted man and an officer, retiring from the Arizona Guard as a major after serving stints in Iraq and along the U.S.-Mexico border.
He needs to go to Minn. and see Michelle Bachman’s husband and he will pray away the gay.
Simple solution.
I suspect if he hooked up with Mr. Bachman there would be more than prayin’ going on….
I don’t know if Brokeback Mountain and The Birdcage are compatible though!
Good thing prayer never has and never will work.
Now he can be gay and get on with his life.
I am well aware of prayer not working my comment was meant to be sarcasm.
I know but it is rare I get to make a comment such as I did.
It is sad he had to hide behind a false bravado for so long and even though he has admitted he is gay he is far from being honest with himself. I wish him the best but his so called conservative brothers and friends are going to shun him in a huge way but sadly he thinks this will not happen.
There is nothing wrong with being gay but he needs to come to serious terms with that fact and I hope he does soon, even if it takes professional help.
I wish him the best but they are going to run him out of dodge and when they do. Remember, there are a lot of us in this world that will accept him for who he is regardless and we are glad he has choose to leave his lies behind him and move on with his life.
I am about as far right as one can go. That said who CARES if he is gay. Most folks have no interest in others personal activities as long as they do not try to indoctrinate US into it. The guy has done a great job THAT is the only thing to be considered when trying for a job. Is has proven he can do the job and do it well. If I lived there he would get my vote…
And you just don’t get it but thanks for playing.
Of course none of us know the facts but it is being suggested that he was threatening the use/abuse of his power. Being gay isn’ t the issue, it’s pretending to be something he’s not. Having a strong stand on illegal immigration while having an intimate relationship with one. No one likes a fake. No one likes a liar.
When the story first broke he was also pretending to be straight. Since there were to many witnesses at the gay bar he changed that part of the story.
Who cares? Well, dollars to donuts, I would say his ultra-conservative constituency. And, to what group of “most folks” are you referring? Certainly, none on the ultra-right. Indoctrinate? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. All us gay folks want is civil, secular marriage and the ultra-right wants to “save” us, “pray away the gay,” and deny us access to civil, secular marriage certificates just because the State happens to use the same word for being wedded as do most churches. It’s all semantics and the ultra-right doesn’t “get it” and never will. So, who is trying to “indoctrinate” whom?
The fact that he is gay is not a problem. The fact that he hid it from his conservative constituents is. The fact that he was stridently anti illegal and dated a man of questionable legality shows more of his hypocrisy.
The fact that he is another hypocrite from the right is maybe not a problem with a lot of right wingers, but the fact that he is gay is a big problem for those folks.
And your statement: ” Most folks have no interest in others personal activities as long as they do not try to indoctrinate US into it” is laughable. The right side of the political spectrum does care if somebody is gay or not. There are a zillion restrictions on gays because of the right.
And your statement of gays trying to “indoctrinate US” shows how well you actually know what gay means. It is not a philosophy that can be taught, you either are or you ain’t. Straight people who have gay friends are not in any danger of being “indoctrinated”.
Who cares.. ??!?!?!? your entire party system.. the GOP is so anti Gay that they make complete fools of themselves and attempt to legislate against Gay behavior….. and US religious groups promote Anti-gay so hard a few African countries have passed laws that result in execution for people found to be Gay..
So… your party.. your friends and fellow conservatives are rabidly anti-gay… perhaps you should work within your own party to convince your fellows that being GAY is not the devil incarnate they think it is…
.and a good portion of the the anti gay movement is about hate… and hate it not something that should be promoted…
The concern is that as a high ranking LEO he would be subject to blackmail.And conservative R’s have plenty of interest in legislating other’s activities.See: Santorum vs.half of US population and then some.
Of course, if he felt he could be out as many LEO’s are, he would not be susceptible to being blackmailed. That is the way security clearances for the government have worked since the 1980’s – if you are out, they don’t care. They just do not want the risk of someone being blackmail-able (is there such a word?).
Good points in all of your posts.
I admire your comment but I think most on the far right would care more about him being gay than the great job he did.
“he has choose?”
I don’t wish him well at all considering the harm that he has caused. Many gay republicans believe that compartmentalizing their lives works and often times it does so long as they play a supportive role on behalf of an employer. Congress is loaded with gay republican staffers who work for elected bosses who cast homophobic votes and these staffers have no problem with it. Their spiritual ancestor is Roy Cohn and their collective neurosis is a
narcissistic belief that since they have power, they can do anything
they want and if someone else suffers, too bad for them. The long standing codependent dance between Maine gay republicans and the GOP party elite is worthy an investigative story in the Maine press.
While I appreciate the comments that being a known homosexual ought to be of no consequence, the fact remains that this man knew perfectly well who his constituency was and how they regarded people like himself. So he created a charade. Unlike the emperor, we now know that the sheriff wears briefs, not boxers. And if he complains about the “unfairness” of the incompatibility of a private life and private businesses versus a public paycheck , then he never heard of the then sitting Kentucky Governor Paul Patton’s lawsuit against a Louisville, Ky. reporter who published a story about that governor’s affair with a female appointee. The judge ruled that whenever a person runs for public office, that person surrenders any claim to privacy. Mr. Bruce Poliquin is finding this out as we speak.
However, Babeu’s sexuality is not what I find odd. At risk of being called a paranoid conspiracy theorist, how did it happen that neighboring Arizona counties elected two C-PAC types (Arpaio and BaBeu) from Western Massachusetts? In any case, Babeu could use a long conversation with Watergate felon and fellow Arizonan Charles Colson about the one’s actions and their consequential collateral impact. While sympathetic to illegal immigration issues, I think there is a better way to deal it with than stroking the American public.
” Gay republican” has got to be an Oxymoron.. please tell me this is true…
Actually,look up Log Cabin R’s.They’ve been around for a long time.
There is nothing wrong with being gay but : REALLY?
Imagine that, a Conservative/Republican/Catholic who expresses disdain for homosexuality, while secretly being a homosexual. I’d say it’s hard for me to imagine, but I’d be lying.
Edit: I’m really surprised it was not removed.
As I said, you can’t this stuff up! I’m on my second cup of coffee and still laughing. It is ALL so typical. What’s in store for this afternoon – Jerry Falwell being a closet transvestite? The video of that man in heels and fishnets singing “Over the Rainbow” at a drag bar? You’d have to haul me to “Bangor on the Hill” (a place, apparently, I was supposed to have caused my mother to say she soon would end up).
If you are enjoying this so much then you must be a democrat/liberal. That begs the question, from someone who is “supposed” to be so tolerant, what is so funny? You should be supporting the guy & saying how unfair it is for anyone to speak against him because he is gay – isn’t that the party line??
It is just another is a long line of hypocrisy. You must see the irony in this situation. The guy is dating a man from Mexico with questionable citizenship and he has a “tough stance” on immigration?
What is not funny about this is that he lives in an environment in which he cannot be himself publicly. It is similar to the soldiers affected by DADT. Unfortunately for this sheriff, there likely is no anti-discrimination law to protect him, and certainly not one in the court of public opinion.
I do sympathize with him. However, a better approach would have been to be open and forthright. He chose not to, for whatever reason, and now those chickens have come home to roost.
Why this is funny to most is because time and time again, the sanctimonious right-wing bible thumpers have the audacity to sit there and preach to us while members of their side are either nailing altar boys, having wide stances in public toilets, voting against gay anything and yet getting caught in the arms of a male prostitute. This list is seemingly endless. And, yet, they wish to stick to their guns publicly while dressed in skin-tight leather, wearing a ball-gag, and having a feather duster inserted where the sun don’t shine. You cannot sit and tell me this is not anything less than “theater of the absurd!”
CHuckGG wrote: And, yet, they wish to stick to their guns publicly while dressed in skin-tight leather, wearing a ball-gag, and having a feather duster inserted where the sun don’t shine.
Now that was funny!
It does conjure up a certain vision.
Would you like some proof these people are beyond kinky? I swear, the more repressed and religiously dogmatic they are, the stranger are their dalliances. Back in 2007, the Reverend Gary Aldridge, 51, was found dead in his own home in Alabama (I mean, really, where else?). You should check out the article and the autopsy report noting carefully what he was wearing and what other accessories were with him. No word if the Duracells had run out. (Links are not graphic but very frank.)
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/crime/dead-reverends-rubber-fetish
http://news.exchristian.net/2007/10/church-pastor-dies-while-enjoying.html
And, of course, some comments from the Landover Baptist Church (!)
http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?t=4931
Not that this isn’t weird enough, but the man was the head of some major coalition of southern churches amounting to a total of around 40,000 parishioners.
From the news article: “Immediately following his death, church officials issued a press release asking community members to “please refrain from speculation” about what led to Aldridge’s demise, adding that, “we will begin the healing process under the strong arm of our Savior, Jesus Christ.””
Yeah, let me know how that works out for you.
Again, it is the hypocrisy with this group that is just beyond the pale. At least on my side of the fence we don’t deny the occasional use of whips, pigeons, a cold flashlight, a goat, a rope, 2 chickens, a length of rope, two-feet of barbed wire, a cheap hotel room, a high-voltage electric cattle prod, two buckets of tepid salt water, and a Mexican.
Sorry, have to run… the salt water is getting too cool and the Mexican is on overtime.
You do know that Landoverbaptist.net is satire, correct?
Oh, of course! It’s too funny!
Don’t forget Mrs. Betty Bowers, America’s Best Christian:
http://www.bettybowers.com/
You fogot to add Sheriff!
The story says he never took a stance on homosexuality, but don’t let the truth get in the way of you total bias against Conservative/Republican/Catholics. Why is it that people who scream about tolerance are the most INTOLERANT of other peoples views?
intolerant? The republicans want to Deny Gay marriage, Deny rights to gay couples.
Thats not true…We are in lockstep with Pres. Obama on the gays getting married!
I think the point of irony is the fact that he’s Conservative/Republican/Catholic but a closet homosexual.
Because a hollow barrel makes the most noise.
I’m sure there are plenty more in the sad place where he came from.Read “The Big Book Of Political Sex Scandals”I’m waiting for V.2
Where does it say he’s Catholic, and I know liberal/ Dems who are against homosexuals marrying.
Bangorian you sound like a bigot. Nowhere in the story is there any mention of Catholic nor was there anything about his ”
disdain for homosexuality”. You sound like an intolerant bigot.
Yes, indeed. One reason so many extreme Right-wingers are gay (closeted, of course, until “outed”) is that the extreme Right-Wing and its attendant religions are home to the most vehement woman-haters (misogynists).
Their anti-choice, anti-contraception nonsense is overtly and flagrantly anti-female.
Many gay men hold women in contempt (see, for example, all major religions), so they would naturally migrate to extreme anti-female ideologies.
Control of women’s reproductive apparatus is central to most religions’ dogma – look it up.
Men, in general (yes, yes, not all, of course), want to control women.
Women’s reproductive capabilities are not under men’s control if women are allowed to use contraceptives which block men’s sacred sperm. Thus, the misogynists preach against contraceptives and women’s ability to control their own bodies.
Nothing new here.
This is the trouble with basing the political polices of a party on social issues. A person cant be gay and think that illegal immigration is wrong? A gay person cannot be conservative, they have to be a democrat? That is a bunch of bs. My grandfather was a democrat and he never had anything nice to say about homosexuals at all.
And did your grandfather believe in the bible and attend church?
Yes he did, he believed in racial equality, was a strong union man but start talking about homosexuals and he would go off.
The issue is he made a threat to keep his secret, not that he was gay, and he has also proven to be dishonest to the people who voted for him. Obviously your grandfather made his honest views known, no comparison. Don’t you find that being strongly against immigration while dating an immigrant just a bit hypocritical?
Your quote : “Don’t you find that being strongly against immigration”
********************************************
Putting the phony Babeau aside…..Conservatives and Conservative Catholics (or Catholics in general) aren’t against immigration. They are against ILLEGAL immigration. Illegal……get it? Ellis Island…..that was LEGAL immigration. Catholic Charities and the Catholic Church are the biggest sponsors of Somali immigrants in this State.
That is true. They have a huge advocate office in Boston for immigrants who are going through the process legally.
I find the whole thing weird . Im married to an immigrant and dont like illegal immigration. I tend to vote more republican and honestly could care less if the sheriff was gay as long as he had integrity and was doing his job. It appears integrity is a bit of an issue with this person.
agreed I really don’t care what two or more consenting adults do .
i have a gay friend and he”s hardcore republican.
Well, I’m still registered Republican and my friends ask me why.
I keep holding out the real Republican will return but I am beginning to think the country club emptied out and it has turned into a country-and-western bar.
Time to throw in the towel, I suppose, and conjure up the spirits of Reagan, Nixon, Ford, Bob Dole (wait, he’s still alive… skip him), Ike, Goldwater, and Rockefeller, and seek their guidance in locating the lost elephant burial grounds called the GOP.
As would I Chuck.. Given the last decade plus of GOP actions, I am stunned anyone is left… they seem to stand for hate and divisiveness and they cling to religious dogma that scares the crap out of the rest of us Americans who do not, and should not have to, share their narrow religious beliefs.
I ca not make any logical sense of any GOP platform… they seem to want to take us back to the 50’s, but the reality is that the 50’s were not all that great…
It is my conclusion that as soon as they are born a set of blinders are pop-riveted to their heads, a bible is shoved into their hands, and any attempt to use logic, free-will, critical thinking, or broad-scope education is instantly quelled. The result is dogmatic thinking and no sense of history. And, in extreme cases, attempts to rewrite history to match the bible (Palin’s explanation of Paul Revere’s ride and “updates” to Wikipedia come to mind).
It really is lunacy. It now is not even a difference of opinion, it is more along the lines that Agent Orange skips a generation and now is kicking in.
What I find particularly annoying is the label assigned to those of us from the original GOP which was fiscally conservative (but not austere) and socially liberal. We are now “RINOs.” Really? I beg to differ. What should have happened is that the Tea Party and primarily the Tea Party Express (the Waffen SS of the Tea Party) should have formed their own party.
I have a feeling this still might happen as the shell of the former GOP has been ransacked to such a point that it is no longer a conservative enough vehicle to move forward. Unfortunately, when the TP/TPE does leave, just as remora often do, the host is left close to dead.
Unfortunately, there are no moderate Republicans to come into the country club, sweep up the mess, and reopen the place. What was the moderate Republican stance is now your average moderate Democrat, with only minor, almost undetectable, differences. Those who fled are unlikely to return. There is no real reason to do so, plus the country club has a lingering odor that may never go away.
.. is it possible that this was seen???
I keep thinking that all of this GOP nonsense has been just to set up a conservative GOP person to run, .. that they are putting up such extremes on purpose to make their less radical candidate seem like a dream in comparison …but no one ever came out of the woodwork, and I came to the conclusion they were actually seriously going to be happy to have Palin as an elected official.. and now the four ring circus of … Gingrich, Santorum, Romney and Paul is just stunning to behold… like the whole party is in complete denial that the country has turned a corner and they just kept on going down the path they were on…
Your comment about logical thinking hits the nail… and to point.. I have not agreed with anyone I have known to be GOP in a long time, but I agree with you… which actually does surprise me.
and to point.. I feel I could have a reasonable debate with you on a subject without fear that you would take it to the Us Vs Them place that all conversation in here seems to devolve to.
Part of why I post here is to show some level of logical and critical thinking…. debate that is actually debate and not just hurling insults back and forth…
So, you are so welcome to the fray… perhaps if you could gather a few more GOP’ers that can think for themselves, we could make progress…
Jason – Thanks for the kinds words. I always have said that I would be happy to engage in any debate as long as it dealt with facts and not completely about emotions. But, as you quite aptly stated, many times all we hear from the ultra-conservatives is a diatribe filled with anger, angst, hatred, and religious dogma. I actually had a Catholic friend tell me, and she was dead serious about this, “You know, there is only one TRUE religion…”. I looked at her in “stunned disbelief.” How narcissistic could one be? But, that is the Kool-Aid forced-fed them. I don’t see much difference between this and North Korea’s “Dear Leader.” Zealots are zealots. Some are more subtle than others.
It is little surprise to me that my ex-Catholic friends, to this day, suffer from the indoctrination imposed upon them when they strayed to the left or the right of that set of rails upon which they were placed. That church has had centuries to refine its passive-aggressive manipulation. That said, I’m not here to beat up on the RCC. I do not have a dog in that fight. It is just an observation related to the ultra-right wing religious ideology that is attempting to be forced into our secular government.
If you want to get away from the pedestrian-level nightmare that is the Republican Debates, try the Intelligence Squared debates. These are on your local PBS station so you need not concern yourself that anyone on the ultra-right is even aware this programming exists.
http://intelligencesquaredus.org/
These are formal debates with the use of critical thinking, logic, and “big words.” It is refreshing to know there are still people out there who think.
As far as the GOP situation being a plot, I don’t know. There is a difference between a person who is conspiratorial and one who is an ideologue. The conspirator and the ideologue both will march to the gates of Hell. The difference is the ideologue will walk in.
I cannot tell if they planned this or not, but I cannot help but believe it all has backfired. Newt & Rick are way too right-wing to be elected in the general. Rick shot himself in the foot with women and his hang-ups about sex and contraception. Newt cannot take too many more carpet bombings from Mitt. That leaves Mitt who, if he gets the nod from the GOP, stands the best chance to win against Obama. However, interest on his side is not strong. Brokered convention? It’s a possibility but what a message that sends to the public.
It is going to be interesting.
Jasn, Ron Paul is the ONLY paleo-conservative of the bunch. A fiscal conservative and social libertarian. Please don’t lump him in with the warvangelical neo-cons.
They do want to go back to the 50’s-just not the 1950’s!Fill in the century of your choice.
This is all the fault of conservative Christians.I know they have three things on their mind-
to rape and indoctrinate my children,to steal my money to advance their agenda, and to deny my sisters and brothers their rights.
Why not try the occupy wall street bunch?
It’s about time u republicans wake up. Now u can see how narrow minded most of them are.
Im 37 and feel the same way you do. I have quite a few of the same beliefs republicans do when it comes to government, business and defense issues. However some of the social issues that they hang on to I do not understand. I told my State Senator once that Republicans loose large amounts of support from younger people like me because of thier positions on abortion and other issues.
Unfortunately, the political meaning of the word “conservative” has been distorted. It used to mean a conservative, limited form of government and government involvement in business and personal issues. Conservative meant the government had no interest or business in becoming involved in personal, social issues. “This is not the business of government” was a phrase used by Barry Goldwater. This was in contrast to the traditional belief that Democrats supported government programs that were involved in one’s life and in business. The lines became somewhat muddied over the years, probably to the benefit of all.
A conservative view of religion inasmuch as it was involved in government was one where religion stayed far away and separate from government. It is entitled in the First Amendment to this special privilege of being separate from the government. Also, the reverse was true. Religion could not be involved with government. These were to remain two separate entities.
People were entitled to do whatever they wished except where excluded by law. Laws were made to tell people what they could not do. If the the law was silent on the issue, it was presumed it was legal. For example, you don’t need a law to tell you it is okay for you to travel to another state.
The original meaning of conservatism encompasses some of the libertarian views but retained governmental structure. If anything, conservative used to mean fiscal conservatism but social liberalism where people were entitled to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Of course, the word “liberal” also has regressed to imply paid-for government services to all instead of meaning a sense of being unencumbered to pursue life. Liberal used to mean free-thinking and freedom without government restrictions.
Contrary to popular belief by the TP/TPE crowd, the Founding Fathers while mostly of a Christian faith were far from the bible-thumpers we see today. They were products of the Age of Enlightenment and many were Masons. Anyone who has studied the Masons knows it has only the concept of a Creator and that is to be determined by the individual Masonic brother. Sounds pretty “free thinking” to me. Somehow, today’s religious crowd seems to think the Founding Fathers were sitting at the right-hand of Jesus during the last supper. In my opinion, based upon my study of the Founding Fathers, they would be appalled at the today’s attempts to turn our democracy into a theocracy. How is this any different than the Islamic states of the Middle East? Different religion, same concepts.
Over time the word “conservative” evolved (some would say “regressed”) to mean ultra-conservative religious and moral views enforced by the government. This is the antithesis of the original meaning of true conservatism. If the TP/TPE party would study William F. Buckley, Jr. who probably is as good as any for what made up the GOP you and I knew, they might get an idea of what modern day (as compared to centuries) conservatism means vs. whatever you want to call the GOP calamity of today.
I hold out little hope for the GOP to return to what you and I know to be conservatism. The closest comparison today probably is Moderate Democrat.
Chuck, you’ve heard of Ron Paul, haven’t you?
Yes, but his stand on same-sex marriage is not to my liking. He has some reasonable ideas but they would be impossible to implement in DC. I have lived and worked here for 30+ years and his goals just aren’t going to happen unless the Presidency becomes a dictatorship.
Whats your point? Is it amazing in your mind this guy is a gay republicam or that you have a friend?
You people are allways so angry.
Its just me, John, no “people” involved I just amuse myself.
he”s my friend and gay and republican. big deal.
Exactly. The idea that all gay people are democrats and that all conservatives hate gays is false.
Don’t be so sure of your statement.
But then again, if you divert your vote for OBAmmuer, I would be happy.
Thank you for your service.
There appears to be very little “diversity” in these comments.
I find it funny. We have to be tolerant for everyone and everything but yet when you disagree with them or take a different view then the tolerance and understanding goes out the window.
Well yes, that is about right when it comes to some conservatives. Being gay is against there religion, Its sad really that Gay converatives can not come out because of fear of not getting reelected.
It’s 2012, this shouldn’t be an issue and people shouldn’t have to live lies.
For some voters it’s a question of what he did when he was running for office in 2008. I don’t read anything about him trying to be seen dating women or that sort of thing.
“Admits” to being gay? Oh, puh-leeze! It’s not the 1950s anymore. I guess we’ll all have to drag the GOP kicking and screaming into the modern world. It shouldn’t matter who the guy sleeps with, but the neanderthals in the Republican Party just can’t seem to snap out of their Leave It To Beaver stupor.
So you’re saying he joined up with the enemy in order to get elected as sheriff in 2008? Maybe some gay people will see him as a traitor for that reason.
Add in another annoying word often used: “confesses” to being gay.
And, as far as it not being 1950’s any longer? Tell that to the ultra-right. I’m expecting the ghost of Senator McCarthy to appear at any moment.
Its too easy to denigrate these “neanderthals” from up here, but on the ground its a juicy stew of hypocrisy, paranoia and fear, and heavily armed to boot. No laughing matter.
Hmmm ? what other group in history rose to power using fear, paranoia and hatred.. and it IS no laughing matter…
That would be the Democrats during the period from the Civil War to the 1970’s. Gosh you should have been in Boston during the early 1970’s. A famous picture of a Louise Day Hicks supporter trying to skewer a black attorney with a flag pole complete with Old Glory. The Democrats party of slavery, segregation, and the KKK. That is what you meant right?
Interestingly at the same time, Massachusetts’ junior senator was the first black Senator ever elected to office in the USA, his name was Ed Brooke, and he was a Republican.
Well said.Scary but 100% correct.And they love to play the persecution game.
I guess another negative for his political future is that he admitted being gay after an “alternative weekly magazine” runs a story to that effect. He waited until something happened where he had to admit it or lie.
Wait, you haven’t heard the last. His next act will be to blame the liberal media for his problems!
Maintaining a clandestine gay lifestyle amid a hard right political constituency noted for anti gay, ultra pro gun, vehemently racist, crypto facist, anti Latino emigrant policies and large blocs of Mormon and evangelical family values supporters; even as he professed to be their strong supporter was bound to be a high wire act fraught with peril for his career. Politically and socially this guy is a mess. An unsavory jumble of contradiction and hypocrisy.
With that kind of internal pressure, this man was a time bomb on several levels… let us hope his past behavior is not now show to reflect anything in his job that was motivated by this pressure.
Boy, under the guise of being “liberal”, you sure use a broad and not so progressive brush with which to paint. “Hypocrisy” is a good word… use it wisely.
Harry I’m not disguised as anything. I’ll gotten beyond parties. What counts to me in my old age is what parties goals are and how they propose to accomplish them and at what cost. You know yourself from history a party’s will do a 180 on their core beliefs from time to time and over the long haul party names have no meaning. Wait long enough and the good and bad will be revealed in both parties and the country. As for dipping my brush promiscuously and labeling hypocrites; and hypocrisy; to do justice to the amount out there; I’m sorry to say you really need a spray gun to think about addressing the problem. Its true that in my view, at this particular time, if the democrats and republicans were on a see-saw in a playground the republicans would be so weighed down with hypocracy the poor democratic kid, although no slouch in that department himself would be stuck with his butt in the air. It is a good word but I’m not sure it can be used wisely. More important is that it is used truthfully. With that caveat make the most of it .
Here’s an example. Obama says he is on the side of the middle class, yet he bailed out big banks, and big auto companies while leaving underwater home owners to fend for themselves.
AND
When this man ran against Hill-the-business-shill Clinton. he said that the big difference between his health care plan and hers was that his did not include a mandate. it was about one-half hour after he took office that he reversed himself.
When he ran as the “anti war” primary candidate did anyone believe he was going to increase the numbers of service people sent to Afghanistan?
He claims to be progressive, yet he signed into law a bill allowing military personnel to arrest and detain, indefinitely, US citizens without access to lawyer or court.
The cynical craven appointment of Kagan and Sotomayor pander much?
The plan for drone flights over the US to target suspected terrorists. I say “suspected” because evidently these people are not entitled to trial either. This just continues the “no trial” policy of an administration that could have, but did not bring Osama Bin Laden before the world court. Guess there was too much he might have said during such a trial, after all he was once our ally whom we armed when he fought the Russians.
Harry
Lets not loose sight of the fact that President Obama was handed an economy that was in free fall and the equivalent of ten pounds of crap in a five pound bag. He tried to get a second round of bailout money but dropped the idea because there was no possibility of support in Congress. So the financial aid stopped where it did because support for more funding ran out. For the future both parties should commit to never allowing business entities to become “too big to Fail” again. This latest extension or addition to the Patriot act is frightening. I respectfully point out this horror show had the support of substantial numbers of both parties. They just convicted some Arab guy outside of Boston not long ago on terrorism charges. The government got a warrant from a secret anti terror court broke into this guys house while he was away and trampled every constitutional right imaginable of this American citizen and in the process the jury nailed him to the wall in spite of the constitution guarantees that are supposed to be the birthright of every American. If the government can do this stuff to an unpopular minority tomorrow they will be doing it to you and me soon. Both parties need to repeal these abominations masquerading as security enhancements. I have no sympathy with your characterizations of the Presidents supreme court nominations. A man elected to the Presidency has a right to nominate qualified persons to the court. Anyone whose party gave us Clarence Thomas and Scalia on the bench should not call anyone else craven for their nominations.
You cherry picked my points. nothing wrong with that, but I wanted you to know I noticed.
Obama bailed out the banks. He did not bail out individual homeowners. He could have done that first (with his original Democrat majority) he did not.
Your justification of Kagan and Sotomayor is that the others picked Thomas and Scalia? That line on a paper would never pass muster where I went to school.
Obama plays fast and loose with constitutional protections, he hasn’t stopped torture, rendition, or closed our Cuban prison… and he in fact
murdered a foreign national without bringing him to trial. What I’m
actually saying is he is just George Bush in black-face.
I am not loyal to ANY politician, political party or organization. I am Loyal to the United States of America, her working people and the principles which made it one of the greatest civilizations ever. Principles which both parties are trashing.
Harry isn’t hindsight a wonderful thing. I didn’t realize responding to your points made me a fruit picker but if it works for you, great. Absolutely do no agree with your crack about Obama being Dubya in blackface. I certainly hope and expect Kagan and Sotomeyer at the end of the day to stand head and shoulders above Thomas and Scalia. I do the best I can. I barely passed muster with the nuns in high school. Tell me, how would the 8 years of Dubya pass muster where you went to school?
ttfn
He’ll make a great politician
Another, “me thinks he doth protest too much” who tried to mask who he is. It’s okay to be gay, but it’s not okay to be going after your own. Bad sheriff, no donut.
You know, you just cannot make this stuff up!
Has anyone been keeping score? I guess it is when they are SO conservative and SO anti-everything, and then get caught with the hands in the cookie jar (well, so to speak), it makes the whole story all that more humorous. Can Rick be far behind?
Truly, I wish the guy the best and hope he has a great life. It won’t be in politics in Arizona, but I am sure something will open up (again, well, so to speak).
Well, you know the link to this story is getting sent to everyone in my address book.
The “Brokeback Mountain” vs. “The Birdcage” comment? Brilliant. You get a gold star from me.
I have had my chuckle for the day. Happy Washington’s Birthday! Is everyone heading to J. C. Penny’s for the “white sale?” I might run into Marcus Bachmann and Paul Babeu selecting new window treatments.
We know who’d be the “man” and who’d not in that relationship. Well, you know, a man in a uniform and all.
Anther “wide stance” self-loathing republicon hypocrite.
yessah
You can’t make this stuff up….
This a good example of why society should openly except homosexuality in the loving spirit of Jesus.
It is the oppression of gays that causes most of the problem associated with homosexuality and not the act itself.
Who really cares?
I can no longer support Babeu after his admission of being engaged in homosexual activity than I could if he were a convicted child molester!
Time to find another conservative with REAL conservative values to support!
A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who,
however, has never learned how to walk forward.
– Franklin D. Roosevelt
I do not care what he dose in his bedroom. Is he a good person? Did he do a good work at his job? Those are the real issues . A small segment of the gay population i do not care much for. The Type that makes the unwanted sexual advances and flaunts it. Like I said that is a very small segment just met a few like that in my day. If I go work on your house please put the naked men pictures away or gay mags. Same way if a woman contractor worked on my house I would not flaunt naked woman pictures or playboy mags on my wall. Respect all people the way you want to be respected.
I wonder if this man ever asked anyone needing help, “What do you do in the bedroom?” before he rendered professional help.
I realize this is a juicy opportunity to bash and villify Conservative/Republican/Catholics (actually, it’s getting old and tiresome) but in the mad rush to malign Conservative/Republican/Catholics…the prevalent bashfest is missing the most important point to this story…..which is:
Sheriff Babeau has a Mexican immigrant for a lover and he threatens him with deportation if he reveals their relationship. Babeau works in law enforcement with the prestige and power that comes with being Sheriff, and wears a badge on his chest and a gun on his hip. The abuse of power in this personal relationship is disgraceful and the use of coersion is a crime.
One final note: I’m a catholic conservative. When we see the law being abused and used to silence a less powerful individual, we call it like we see it. Yes, we nail our own to the wall. We hate lawlessness wherever it occurs. Liberals who exercise hatred on a daily basis reveal a lack of intelligent thinking by declaring any and ALL Conservative/Republican/Catholics as possessing the same lack of morals and principals as the fake and phony Sheriff Babeau.
You make a fine point until you punctuate it with partisan stupidity. You’re engaging in the exact same behavior you complain about.
You should have stopped at ” making a fine point.” That the Sheriff is a closet Gay is a choice that many gays still choose. The Sheriff’s power over his immigrant lover is what is reprehensible (and a crime)
As far as engaging in the exact same behavior I complain about is not true. If I had said, Liberals reveal a lack of intelligent thinking…..or Liberals “are” hate-filled people who…then you could accuse me of the broad brush syndrome. My stipulation is and was (who exercise hatred on a daily basis) But in re-reading it, I can see where it was interpreted as including all Liberals. Perhaps I could have said “some” Liberals… to make the distinction, but “some” doesn’t quite express the knee-jerk reaction of a percentage of Liberals who actually hate Conservatives or Republicans or Catholics and reveal that hatred every chance they get. The bashing is endless.
I appreciate you saying I make a fine point concerning the abhorrent behavior of Babeau.
When you only have an issue with liberals who exercise hate and not those who exercise hate in general, that makes you a partisan hack and put you in no position to talk about morals. You complain about bashing and do the same. Your behavior is laughable. Also, there is no need to cover your bases and say “some”, because you continue to go on and indicate that you don’t believe it is just some.
Your point about gays being immoral is actually stupid and I didn’t mean that aspect of your comment was “fine.” What was fine was denouncing hate, until you went on to indicate that your brand of hate is fine.
LOL….I just got a gripping superfluous lecture from a self-appointed honcho of hot air.
Wow! I took my “likes” off both your posts.
How is your post (directly above) not an exercise hatred? BTW there are MANY MANY liberal Catholics. Did you miss the fact that John Kerry, Barney Frank, Andrew Cuomo, and the Kennedy family happen to be Catholic? I’m absolutely positive that those liberals do not “hate Catholics.”
AND
fwteagles there are “liberal” Republicans, and conservative Democrats. so “partisan’ is not the correct word. Hack is also misapplied.
I’m a Catholic…need I say…God forbid…a Conservative/Republican/Catholic. I’m surrounded by Liberal Catholics most of the time. (Not complaining…just saying I am quite aware of Liberal Catholics) Although there are Conservative and Moderates.
fwteagles claimed I should have been expounding on “hate” in general. I have to read, all the time on this BDN comment section, the derogatory and offensive names and labels and evil intents directed at Conservatives and Republicans. ( Like we’re snakes and vipers) Examples are even set in Congress to demonize conservatives. Maxine Waters declared publicly that we are “demons” I’ve yet to see any evidence of a Liberal condemning that conduct and behavior.
The only point I was making today was the blatant hypocrisy of the Sheriff and the horrific power he had over an immigrant lover. There should be more repercussions for the sheriff than just losing an election. If I felt I should be instructed by fwteagles to comment on hate in general, the BDN monitor/s would stop my posts as being “off topic.”
I attempted to have a civil back and forth discourse with fwteagles and he or she would have none of it. fwteagles refused to give up the drumbeat of me being a “hack” and totally guilty of a hate-filled temperament.
I washed my hands of fwteagles when he or she accused me of making a point that gays are immoral…Here’s the quote from fwteagles: (“Your point about gays being immoral is actually stupid”) I challenge anybody to find in my posts where I ever accused gays as being immoral. That is an out and out lie. fsteagles not only derides, maligns and denigrates this conservative/republican/catholic…he lies about the content of my comments.
How about you Harry? Look it all over and perhaps you will post a quote of mine where I said gays are immoral. I did well to just call it “hot air”
Just wait until you see the savage remarks that will appear on these comment sections when the Catholic church takes up the fight (again) on legalizing same-sex marriage in Maine.
OH BTW…Harry Snyder. My short post was not an exercise in hatred. It was an exercise in harshness. (Which will be right up fwteagles ally)
Let me leave it at this:
I liked most of your original post, and no, I saw no homophobia. BUT I have on occasion been accused of being homophobic.
I happen to “FAVOR gay marriage, because I believe in a generation that will bring younger gay families into the “fiscally conservative” column. Look at the figures. These people have higher than average incomes, usually have no children, and have lifestyles not dissimilar from self-absorbed Wall Street bankers. Perfect fodder for the new less socially conservative, more libertarian Republican party..
I still can’t get any Liberal, Conservative, Moderate , Independent or even a commenter with no political affiliation whatsoever to recognize the atocity of Babeau threatening his immigrant lover into silence. There is such a disparity in the Sheriff”s relationship with his Mexican lover. It’s the same situation as women who are married to abusive cops. There is nothing like a badge, a nightstick and gun to silence a mistreated and abused wife. I was acquainted with a woman, married to an overbearing and abusive cop. He used to tantalize her after leaving her in a corner…. frightened and scared by sneering at her and saying “Who you gonna call…..the cops?”
The same goes for the high and mighty Sheriff towards his partner. The immigrant finally spoke up. Think of how fearful he must have been? I wouldn’t mess with a law enforcement officer who has more than fists to exact silence from me. Just think of the power and authority he could hold over the immigrant’s head? It’s disgusting.
But commenters on this thread want to disparage Republicanism and Conservatism as the reason for his secret life and the power he used to silence his anxious and frightened partner. As I started reading down through the comments to see if any others had picked up on what I thought was the most egregious of the Sheriff’s behavior, I had to, for the umpteenth time, plow through all the inuendos and outright insinuations of the stupidity and backwardness of the GOP. I even got accused of “my stupidity” in pointing out that gays are immoral. That fabricated accusation has no basis in fact.
I was stunned to see so many tolerant and staunch supporter of the LGBT cause actually wish the Sheriff well and encouraged him to now live a good life ! They gave no credence or thought to the oppressiveness and fearful tyranny he subjected his gay partner to. Gay, straight or otherwise, Sheriff Babeau is a disgrace to his uniform, to law enforcement and an oppressive master to another human being under his control.
I don’t know who you are speaking about. There have been several posts mentioning the “authority abuse” thing as a high negative. I said I “liked” most of your post… to what part did you think I referred?
The terms liberal & conservative are so meaningless, I have been accused of being both by different detractors commenting on a single post.
Disagree. He specified “liberal” in his denouncing of hatred. Then went on to imply that liberals are more likely to engage in hatred and “bashing.” He engaged in the exact behavior he complained about. The term is not misapplied in my opinion.
Are you looking in the mirror?
”
we nail our own to the wall”
Don’t you use a cross sometimes???
Awwww…..aren’t you being cute and clever. I have a unexpected piece of news for you. You and I nailed Jesus to the cross. Don’t leave yourself out !
Not me, I was too busy having an affair with an illegal Mexican man.
Yes, you too are guilty of nailing Jesus to the cross. I’ll explain it to you if you wish.
The gay Sheriff’s lover is a legal immigrant.
”
I’ll explain it to you if you wish. ”
Talk to the hand Sister Kiki!
He may be guilty of doing the nailing, but I sold him the hammer, nails and dogwood tree. Then I sold tickets.
Isn’t this just slightly off subject? Or is someone comparing this sheriff to Jesus?
This story won’t be turned into a Lifetime movie on cable will it?
People might be interested in reading the book:
Buttino, Frank. A SPECIAL AGENT. William Morrow, 1993.
Investigates F.B.I. attacks on gay FBI agents .
This book is written by a FBI agent who is gay. It details how other FBI
agents tormented him .
see http://www.lambdaarchives.us/2010_honorees/frank_buttino.htm
Frank’s brother was the producer for the PBS hit series READING RAINBOW
The High Sheriff should have known that as soon as he declared that he planned to seek the office that his sexual orientation would come out. His best course of action would have been to have gone public before he announced as a candidate. I am afraid that his failure to do so will now be his undoing.
Was he a good sheriff?
Coming from a proudly liberal background, I find it hard to say the following.
Isn’t this guy innocent until proven guilty? Haven’t we all heard the horror of divorce stories where one side or the other will lie for vengeance?
Please get some facts right, it only takes reading skills. The sheriff had previously come out and then moved. He did not claim to be straight, he only refused to “flaunt” being gay, as if admitting to being gay is flaunting.
If he did abuse his office, fire him, don’t elect him, jail him. If he did not abuse his office, then take it out on his former lover.
HERE WE GO AGAIN,ONLY WITH A MODERN DAY MONICA LEWINSKI!!!
He should move to Bangor and run for Penobscot County Sheriff…the position may be opening up soon.
I thought all cop were gay…
Change the “R” to “H”. The Hypocrite Party.