Conservatives Values: Gay Prostitution is Ok but Gay Marriage is Immoral

[Geek_Girl]

The conservatives who push for anti-gay marriage legislation seem to be defending Gannon/Guckert/Bull Dog's "personal life" of whoring himself for $200 an hour.

I wonder who the bigger whore is Gannon or the right wing talking heads who defend him.

[Rican1]

1. As John Stewart said

It's okay because Guckert was on top.

[steelyboo]

6. exactly, the rethugs take the philosophy "it is better to GIVE than to

RECEIVE" and apply their own meaning :P

[theorist]

2. Sorry, but I have to correct you.

That's $200 per hour. Thanks. :)

[Geek_Girl]

3. Thanks for the correction

:hi:

[Jack Rabbit]

4. This is starting to look like strained logic, isn't it

Okay, prostitution (gay or straight) is seedy, but I still don't think that's the most important part of this story.

The White House, which has already been caught in the pundit payola scandal and with disseminating a PR production as a news story, has used a ringer in the White House press room. The administration, which has an all to compliant corporate media at its back, is attempting to manage the news.

Mr. Gannon's personal scandals are red herrings. Rove would probably be delighted if we talked about nothing else.

[blm]

5. Except all the RW talking heads are now saying gay prostitution is just

one's "private life" as if there's nothing wrong with it while all last year they talked about the immorality of gay marriage.

So, LEGAL unions between gays is immoral while ILLEGAL sex-trade unions between gays is OK.

[Jack Rabbit]

10. I agree, there's a bit of irony in that

Schadenfreude, anybody?

We know they're hypocrites. However, if we make that the biggest part of this story instead of the subvertion of the institution of a free and independent press, then we are no better.

[blm]

13. Come on, Jack. Noone's making it the BIGGEST part of the story.

It just happens to be the most HYPOCRITICAL part of the story.

There's alot of BIGS and whatever helps catch public attention for the greater story...GOOD.

[Jack Rabbit]

16. It sells soap

But it's still not the most impotant part of the story.

[Geek_Girl]

21. The Sad reality is

Many Americans don't give a shit about a "free and independent press" if they did there wouldn't be any fox news or CNN because people wouldn't watch that crap. "Our free and independent" wouldn't be in such a sad shape if Americans actually cared about it.


And Americans aren't the victims of the shape of our media their the root cause of it.

[Jack Rabbit]

23. Maybe some Americans don't

A lot of Americans don't know what a free and independent press looks like. It's been about a quarter of a century since we've had a free and independent press. Not that there's any government censorship, there isn't. However, the government doesn't control events, transnational corporations do. They own both the press and the Bushies.

But I care about it. And, at least until Patriot Act II is passed, I am an American citizen. I take it by the tone of your post that you care, too.

[Geek_Girl]

7. I disagree

I think the fact that he is a male prostitute is a big part of the story.

Think about it, how in the world would someone like Gannon with no jounalism experience, no education ect.. get that kind of access. If he was a beautiful bombshell female you'd know the answer.

If they just wanted a shill they could have gotten someone with better credentials. But this guy was most likely selected to be a plant because of a personal relationship with someone high up.

[Jack Rabbit]

8. . . . and I still disagree with you . . .

Think about it, how in the world would someone like Gannon with no journalism experience, no education etc.. get that kind of access. If he was a beautiful bombshell female you'd know the answer.

How in the world? Because he was willing to ask softball questions barbed with invective against the opposition and no other reason, that's how.

The fact that he turns out to be a gay pimp embarrasses them now, but we can't really assume they knew this. If he had been a straight, married, church-going white bread Republican with an honest job, it would have suited them a lot better. However, as long as he was willing to ask the right questions with the proper unprofessional tone, they didn't care about his secret life and probably didn't even look into it.

It didn't occur to them that he was any other kind of whore. The only thing they cared about is that he was a media whore.

[blm]

9. But he WASN'T a mediawhore. He had no CREDENTIALS in the media, so

the question remains how did he BECOME a media person to those in the White House?

[Jack Rabbit]

11. Exactly

And I don't think it has anything to do with his secret life. That is probably a big surprise to Scott McClellan, too.

He became a media person because he was willing to be a plant. That is what made him useful to these yuppie fascists.

[zann725]

14. This was NO surprise to Scotty. Did you see the glow on his face...

talking to Jeff? I've seen a lot of Scotty press conferences, and NEVER saw "that look" before.

He knew.

[Geek_Girl]

18. But you can throw a dart with your eyes close and hit a media whore

that is "willing" to shill for the White House. The odds that they just happened to pick someone who is a prostitute is pretty unlikely And as of this past week he was still prostituting himself. Washington D.C isn't that big that they couldn't figure this out pretty quickly.

[Jack Rabbit]

20. See post 15

I cannot see but that they overlooked his background. Given that homophobia is a centerpiece of administration policy, it must embarrass them to have this come out. This has even become embarrassing to the right wing bloggers who are showing that they are more loyal to Bush than to any warped idea of "family values".

The problem is that this could be figured out pretty quickly, as you say. Indeed, it was figured out pretty quickly. It has been less than three weeks since Gannon drew attention to himself by asking a ridiculously biased question at a presidential press conference. Now, his career in journalism, such as it was, is finished.

David Corn pointed out in The Nation earlier this week that there are other journalists willing to shill for the White House with better credentials than Gannon. However, they may want more than one go-to guy when they need one. Gannon was more than willing to be used and they were more than willing to use him. That was all that mattered to them.

[Geek_Girl]

22. Don't you think that is was just typical White House Hubris

That they thought no one would find out. They pretty much have the MSM in their back pocket.

As far as wanting to have more than one go to guy they are training wing nuts everyday to shill for the GOP. It's like they have mini wing nut factories pushing these folks out into the MSM to shill.

[Jack Rabbit]

24. No. This was too obvious.

The guy was all over the net. If they had looked, they would have found it. All they had to do was trace back Talon News' phone number. That's how some bloggers uncovered Gannon's "secrets".

Rule 1: If you can find it, others can. Corollary: If they had looked, they would have found it. Conclusion: They simply didn't look.

[Geek_Girl]

25. Possibly Or They Knew and didn't think they'd get caught

People do strange things for lamoure

:crazy: :loveya:

[Geek_Girl]

12. I don't think They're that Sloppy

That they've overlooked his background. I just don't think that's the case.

This guy was a plant obviously but they could have put anyone in that position to shill. I don't think Gannon was the only person that they could find to throw soft balls at the president. They've got wing nuts coming out of the wood works these days surely they could have found someone with more experience and credentials.

[Jack Rabbit]

15. They were that sloppy, believe me

Back in the old days (mid-seventies or so), when all but really eccentric gays were in the closet, the rationale for denying a homosexual a security clearance was that he was susceptible to blackmail. That makes sense as long as he is trying to keep his homosexuality a secret. Nowadays, as long as the homosexual is out of the closet, there is no question of susceptibility to blackmail. You can't threaten to expose his secret life if there is no secret life.

Trust me on this. I had an MI MOS (98J) in the Army in the late seventies. That was the rationale for denying homosexuals a security clearance in those days. I heard one MI officer after another say as much.

Now, if I were the White House press office, working in an administration that uses homophobia as a campaign tactic, I wouldn't have touched Gannon with a ten-foot pole if I knew he was gay, and certainly not if I knew he was a gay pimp/prostitute.

Gannon had a reason to hide his secrets from both the public and the White House. It has come out, and the White House is embarrassed because they've used him. You're right, they could have found somebody else. Right now, they're wishing they had.

However, if that angle of the story weren't there, would the use of a plant by the White House be any more ethical? No.

Gannon's private life is seedy, but it is not a threat to democratic institutions. The subversion of a free and independent press is.

[despairing optimist]

17. Hustling is part of the ownership society, the entrepreneurial spirit

so it's part of an American institution, while gay marriage threatens an institution.

Of course the people who believe this *belong* in an institution, but for now they're content with preaching to the rest of us. It's all in the Kool-Aid served.

[NVMojo]

19. These hypocrites are nothing but a bunch of salacious f*ch sticks!