Dan Riehl Responds

And drools all over himself. The response to my pointing out his hypocrisy regarding his differing treatment of Larry Craig and Glenn Greenwald– a post titled “I Guess John Cole Is A C***S*****, Too”:

Balloon Juice’s John Cole deflates any sense of morality I can only imagine he once had. I don’t read him much and never have consistently. He cites my protest, and those of others, of the sexual McCarthyism in which the Left is currently engaged and compares it to a post I did on Glenn aka GiGi Greenwald some time ago, mentioning his homosexuality.

The problem for Cole is that Greenwald wasn’t closeted – and that’s even assuming a sitting Senator also in question, was, or is. Not one shred of evidence or acknowledgment in that regard exists. Yet, Greenwald was and is homosexual based upon his own public acts and words. That isn’t outing someone, whether someone doesn’t like me or another joking about it is immaterial to the point.

And when self-professed holier than thou jerk-offs who lie, or create myths to support the genuinely disturbed and disturbing sexual McCarthyism of their unprincipled colleagues, as I said, I’ll just assume they are genuine, even if closeted, c***s******, too.

Apparently, even though I disagree with the outing of Larry Craig, the fact that I also recognize that the GOP uses gay bashing and homophobic hysteria for their own political purposes makes me one of them dirty ‘C***S******.”

Quite a change I have gone through in just a few short years- ardent conservative to homo liberal. Life is, if nothing else, interesting. These ‘conservatives’ are just making voting for the Democrats this November easier and easier. Couple more salvos like this and I might not even have to hold my nose when I vote for the donks, and may even have to slap up a Byrd bumper sticker on the car.

Really, though. I don’t know how you can read that and not see the overt homophobia and the sickness that is Riehl’s mindset. I am sure Dobson and Rove love it. But can we please end the charade- conservative oppostion to Gay marriage and homosexual rights may be, in the minds of a few, about protecting traditional marriage. But in the minds of many, it is just like Dan Riehl- a knee-jerk reaction to fear.

And by the way- if anyone wants to know whether I am gay or straight or bi or whatever, the answer is simple- it is none of your God damned business. Answering that question plays their game, not mine, and if I refute the charge that I am gay, it sends the message that I think there is something wrong with being gay.

*** Update ***

Dan Riehl is unhinged:

That was an older brother of mine, John. He’s dead and, yes, he was Gay. You want to know how he died? He died alone, probably of aids for all I know and probably in a San Francisco flop house living on the government’s dime. I say probably because it was the last address I ever had for him from letters exchanged, not having seen the boy/man since I was about 15.

And you know why he died alone? Not because he was Gay. He died that way because of small minded assholes who think that being Gay in America is a crime. And who is perpetuating that stereotype and trying to benefit from it, today, Cole? Me? Because I can mock someone whether they are straight or gay, because the orientation has no bearing on how I treat someone, one way or the other?

***

And don’t you dare try to turn this into another prime example of intolerance on the Right, when clearly it is not.

It is but another new low low in the all time record book of disgusting liberal tactics which have nothing more noble as their goal than a power grab. And your unmoral defense of it is a corollary to its vulgar and ugly intent.

This is not the Right’s shame, no matter how you’ll try to make it so. It is the Left’s disgrace. I called you a c***S***** because of the weak-kneed lip service you are providing to your most repugnant cronies on the Left. Whether or not you derive some sexual gratification from giving them that service, I couldn’t care less.

Balloon Juice? Give me a break. Don’t look now, John, but I think the balloon exploded and the juice is running from your lips. Here’s hoping you enjoyed, it c***s*****.

All I did was half-jokingly call you a name you earned. Congratualtions, obviously, it was well deserved.

Read the whole, sad, deplorable post. Apparently he can’t be a bigot because he had a brother that was gay, so when he writes something sick and offensive and attacks Glenn Greenwald and Andrew Sullivan for being gay, it is just because he, unlike everyone else, feels comfortable ‘joking’ about everyone.

A regular humanitarian, an Archie Bunker, this guy- the basest of the conservative ‘base.’

Attn: Leon. That, my friend, is hysterical ire.

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit






182 replies
  1. 1
    Davebo says:

    C****S********?

    I say you two meet after school by the merry go round and hash this out like grown ups!

    Seriously though, that’s just hilarious!

  2. 2
    LLeo says:

    I know this is of topic, but can anyone point out statements and/or legislative initiatives that indicate that Nancy Pelosi (the soon to be Speaker of the House) is a radical Lefty Socialist Nutjob?

    I genuinely do not know here political philosophy. This is a real question. From her statements she is clearly partisan, but so was Newt Gingrich.

  3. 3
    LLeo says:

    BTW, the hypocracy is obvious, and I really don’t care if John Cole smokes the pole.

  4. 4
    Steve says:

    Yet, Greenwald was and is homosexual based upon his own public acts and words. That isn’t outing someone, whether someone doesn’t like me or another joking about it is immaterial to the point.

    That is, of course, the same position all the conservatives took on the Mary Cheney incident. Isn’t it?

  5. 5
    Rob says:

    Quite a change I have gone through in just a few short years- ardent conservative to homo liberal. Life is, if nothing else, interesting.

    Not really that funny, but I laughed out loud.

  6. 6
    ? says:

    You are utterly amazing!

    What you’ve done here over the past few years cannot have been easy for you. And yet you are just plain unstoppable.

    So honest!

    You are the best!

  7. 7
    Ugh says:

    compares it to a post I did on Glenn aka GiGi Greenwald some time ago, mentioning his homosexuality.

    Ah yes, “mentioning” his homosexuality, let’s see:

    Gay Blogger Boy Toy dolls

    we’ll need anatomically correct dolls for Gay male Liberals

    you can’t offer a Gay male doll without a cat

    no telling what they’ll sneak off to the closet to do with a doll that comes with manly bits

    Precious, that one is.

  8. 8

    That’s quite the site he’s running over there. Every other post is some hyperbolic whine involving name calling.

  9. 9
    Ugh says:

    That is, of course, the same position all the conservatives took on the Mary Cheney incident. Isn’t it?

    Heh.

  10. 10
    Pb says:

    OMG, How could I have never seen it before–the box wine should have been my first clue!

    Anyhow, that Riehl guy is pretty sick. What’s his problem?

  11. 11
    Dan Riehl says:

    That’s quite the site he’s running over there. Every other post is some hyperbolic whine involving name calling.

    I see the comments section here is filled with filthy C*** S*****

    Fag!

  12. 12
    John Cole says:

    OMG, How could I have never seen it before—the box wine should have been my first clue!

    I have seen a few episodes of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, and I am reasonably sure that the fact I drink box wine would work to prove that I am NOT gay. I will have to ask all my friends tonight at the weekly assless chaps meeting Sports Bar.

  13. 13
    Pb says:

    ROFL. Incidentally, check out this blog I found thanks to Riehl’s comment section… crazy stuff!

  14. 14
    RSA says:

    if I refute the charge that I am gay. . .

    Damn, I was expecting a Samuel Johnsonesque “I refute it thus,” with description and perhaps sound effects.

  15. 15
    Pb says:

    John Cole,

    I have seen a few episodes of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy

    Aha, a second clue!

    and I am reasonably sure that the fact I drink box wine would work to prove that I am NOT gay

    Oh well, there goes that theory. I know nothing about wine, by the way. Or beer either, really. Does that make me gender-neutral, or does the beard ruin that?

    I will have to ask all my gay friends tonight at the weekly assless chaps meeting.

    Now that sounds like fun. I don’t have any assless chaps, though. Actually, come to think of it, I haven’t gone down to the ol’ gay club in a while now.

  16. 16
    Demdude says:

    OMG, How could I have never seen it before—the box wine should have been my first clue!

    No self respecting “MO” would admit to drinking box wine.

  17. 17
    Steve says:

    And by the way- if anyone wants to know whether I am gay or straight or bi or whatever, the answer is simple- it is none of your God damned business.

    Good luck hooking up with that attitude!

  18. 18
    Darrell says:

    But can we please end the charade- conservative oppostion to Gay marriage and homosexual rights may be, in the minds of a few, about protecting traditional marriage

    First, many/most Dems, including their Presidential candidate have come out publicly in opposition to legalizing gay marriage, so cut the crap laying this all on the door of the Republicans. Many devout Christians are in the Dem party.. not just in black churches either.

    Second, most who oppose gay marriage, don’t ‘hate’ or want to bash gays (my opinion) any more than they hate or want to bash gamblers, womanizers, or others who engage in behavior which they may find morally objectionable. They have sincere moral objections to this behavior.

    Third, I think Riehl’s distinction is a valid one, assuming it’s true that Greenwald is openly sexual as he claims. In that situation, he couldn’t be ‘outed’, as he has made no secret about his sexuality.

  19. 19
    John D. says:

    Third, I think Riehl’s distinction is a valid one, assuming it’s true that Greenwald is openly sexual as he claims. In that situation, he couldn’t be ‘outed’, as he has made no secret about his sexuality.

    Like Mary Cheney?

  20. 20
    Vlad says:

    Good on you, John.

  21. 21
    JKC says:

    I see from Riehl’s rantings that he’s either still afraid of girls, or is so graceless that he coudn’t get laid in a whorehouse.

    Or maybe both.

  22. 22
    John D. says:

    No self respecting “MO” would admit to drinking box wine.

    Hey now…

    I proposed to my wife (of 16 years now!) half-lit on a 5-liter wine box of White Grenache.

  23. 23
    John Cole says:

    I proposed to my wife (of 16 years now!) half-lit on a 5-liter wine box of White Grenache.

    And lemme guess- she drank one too, said yes, and has never been the same since!

    Third, I think Riehl’s distinction is a valid one, assuming it’s true that Greenwald is openly sexual as he claims. In that situation, he couldn’t be ‘outed’, as he has made no secret about his sexuality.

    Openly sexual? Like Madonna?

    Please don’t ‘queer’ this debate, Darrell.

  24. 24
    Perry Como says:

    I say you two meet after school by the merry go round and hash this out like grown ups!

    Purses at ten paces!

  25. 25
    John D. says:

    And lemme guess- she drank one too, said yes, and has never been the same since!

    I plead the fifth (of bourbon I slipped her).

    16 years, 2 kids, still drinking wine. I can’t complain.

  26. 26
    LLeo says:

    First, many/most Dems, including their Presidential candidate have come out publicly in opposition to legalizing gay marriage, so cut the crap laying this all on the door of the Republicans. Many devout Christians are in the Dem party.. not just in black churches either.

    For once, Darrell is right. That may be the 5th or 6th sign of the appocolypse. Dems definitely play the hypocrite on this issue. Clinton passed DOMA as one of his weasly triangulation efforts. One of my big problems with Dems is that they have no balls even when they know they are completely correct and moral in their beliefs.

    Second, most who oppose gay marriage, don’t ‘hate’ or want to bash gays (my opinion) any more than they hate or want to bash gamblers, womanizers, or others who engage in behavior which they may find morally objectionable. They have sincere moral objections to this behavior.

    This still begs the question any REAL conservative would ask: Is it the place of the Federal Government to legislate morallity? Shouldn’t the People have the right to determine this in their own private lives?

  27. 27
    Ted says:

    Second, most who oppose gay marriage, don’t ‘hate’ or want to bash gays (my opinion) any more than they hate or want to bash gamblers, womanizers, or others who engage in behavior which they may find morally objectionable. They have sincere moral objections to this behavior.

    Of course the problem is that barring marriage for gay couples stop absolutely zero behavior. It just makes life more difficult for a percentage of America’s couples.

    I have huge moral objections to fundamentalist Christians brainwashing their children into their ‘faith’. I wouldn’t ever presume to advocate they be denied their right to do it.

  28. 28
    Mike S says:

    That is, of course, the same position all the conservatives took on the Mary Cheney incident. Isn’t it?

    Why do Democrats always have to dig up the far distant past to make their points?

  29. 29
    Richard 23 says:

    Third, I think Riehl’s distinction is a valid one, assuming it’s true that Greenwald is openly sexual as he claims.

    Yeah! Openly sexual! How dare he? Kill GiGi! And gay scoutmasters too.

    The desire to discriminate against gays is earnest and sincere and not based in bigotry, right? I think I finally understand.

  30. 30

    BTW, anybody else notice the ads on Riehl’s site?

    I’ve seen quite a few righty blogs now running this ad about how the Republicans want to eliminate the Mortgage Tax Deduction.

    Of course it doesn’t say Republicans… it says Congress… but it’s actually a Republican idea. It came from President Bush’s Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform last year.

    They also want to eliminate the deduction for property taxes.

    Anyway, I just thought it funny that the right is running around in hysterics about something their own guys came up with.

  31. 31
    Darrell says:

    Openly sexual? Like Madonna?

    Please don’t ‘queer’ this debate, Darrell.

    Ok, I mistyped. Openly ‘homosexual’, not ‘openly sexual’. But are you still insisting that your comparison between Riehl’s “outing” of Greenwald who (apparently?) openly claims to be homosexual, is analogous to outing Larry Craig who chose to keep his preferences private? Do you still stand by that?

  32. 32
    Shalimar says:

    Dan Riehl seems to spend alot of time thinking and writing about c*** s******. I wonder why that is?

    Third, I think Riehl’s distinction is a valid one, assuming it’s true that Greenwald is openly sexual as he claims.

    No, Riehl is full of shit. I have no idea what part he played if any, but I do remember that at one point a few months ago right-wing bloggers were posting about Greenwald’s background and did believe that they were outing him (with details from a lawsuit where he admitted to being gay). It was only from Greenwald’s response that they found out that his homosexuality wasn’t a secret. Their intent was obvious, there was no distinction except in the outee’s reaction.

  33. 33
    Dug Jay says:

    New from the Left: Gay McCarthyism…kind of has a nice ring to it…

  34. 34

    For once, Darrell is right. That may be the 5th or 6th sign of the appocolypse. Dems definitely play the hypocrite on this issue. Clinton passed DOMA as one of his weasly triangulation efforts. One of my big problems with Dems is that they have no balls even when they know they are completely correct and moral in their beliefs.

    I gotta admit, it’s an issue that I don’t really care about.

    Although the more I hear Darrell spout off about it, the more I want to shove gay marriage down his throat. So I’m not sure if that’s a good motivator or not.

    I would agree though, that by trying to have it both ways the Democrats in fact actually reinforce the Republican position. They ought to just try to shove gay marriage down Darrell’s throat like my gut wants to do.

  35. 35
    Steve says:

    The site that first did all the digging into Greenwald’s background claimed that he “attempted to use the law to conceal the fact that he is a homosexual.”

    So you see, apparently he was trying to hide his sexual orientation, yet at the same time he was “out” and thus fair game. How droll.

  36. 36

    Ok, I mistyped. Openly ‘homosexual’, not ‘openly sexual’. But are you still insisting that your comparison between Riehl’s “outing” of Greenwald who (apparently?) openly claims to be homosexual, is analogous to outing Larry Craig who chose to keep his preferences private? Do you still stand by that?

    You’re going to have to help me here.

    What exactly is the difference?

  37. 37
    Rusty Shackleford says:

    Pb Says:
    Oh well, there goes that theory. I know nothing about wine, by the way. Or beer either, really. Does that make me gender-neutral, or does the beard ruin that?

    Depends on how short and well maintained that beard is.

  38. 38
    neil says:

    Look, it’s obvious, isn’t it? Glenn Greenwald is a bad person and is gay, and being gay is bad, so it’s OK to call him gay. On the other hand, Larry Craig is not a bad person, so whether or not he’s gay, you can’t say he is because that would be an insult.

    I hope I have cleared up Riehl’s world view.

  39. 39
    Richard 23 says:

    Second, most who oppose gay marriage, don’t ‘hate’ or want to bash gays (my opinion) any more than they hate or want to bash gamblers, womanizers, or others who engage in behavior which they may find morally objectionable. They have sincere moral objections to this behavior.

    When you say “most” and “they” are you speaking about yourself using the “some say” technique? What’s your opinion?

    It seems to me your hiding behind “them.” If you oppose equal rights for gay people, you should be proud of that and speak of it loudly.

  40. 40
    Sal says:

    Who the hell is Dan Riehl? Who cares?

  41. 41
    John Cole says:

    Darrell-

    Glenn Greenwald, to my knowledge, was not openly gay. If I am wrong about that, I stand corrected. Even if he was openly gay, I fail to see why the sexual orientation of a blogger refutes his postions on terrorism and the law, and I fail to see why a mean-spirited attack on him that borders on obsession is excusable.

    I also think, as I have stated repeatedly, that I think it is wrong that Craig was outed, just as I felt it was wrong that Mary Cheney’s sexual orientation was brought up in 2004. However, the reason it is a scandal to the right wing bloggers that he was outed is not so much that they view his privacy as important, but thaqt they are worried that it may impact the election. The Democrats don’t care that Craig is gay, they would care that he is gay and closeted and voting on anti-gay measures. The Republicans, on the other hand, care that he is gay BECAUSE they have a problem (publically, for political reason, but not privately, as the gay-bashing is just a charade) with him being gay and because they worry how the base, whipped into a frenzy about the threat of teh gay, might vote.

    Was it wrong to out Craig if he is gay? Yes.
    Was it wrong to claim he was gay if he is not? Yes.
    Is it wrong for Republicans to act like being gay is wrong and the root of all evil? Yes.
    Are some on the left being hypocrites when they out closeted gays? Yes, but not nearly as hypocritical as the GOP who hides the fact that many of their members and staff are gay and then spends millions of dollars and thousands of hours advancing anti-gay legislation.
    Is it the fault of the GOP that being ‘gay’ is somehow seen as a smear. In large part, yes.

    I assure you, I do not find these positions to be contradictory in the least.

  42. 42

    So you see, apparently he was trying to hide his sexual orientation, yet at the same time he was “out” and thus fair game. How droll.

    Didn’t Larry Craig out himself when he actively tried to hook up with another gay person?

    It’s kind of hard to keep a secret if you’re telling other people about it.

  43. 43
    DGO says:

    I agree with Darrell in as much as many in the gay community seem to think that the Dems are fantastic w.r.t. “gay rights” and the GOP is terrible. The fact is everyone has, to some degree, let us down (or worse).

    However, I want to challenge this oft told tale:

    Second, most who oppose gay marriage, don’t ‘hate’ or want to bash gays (my opinion) any more than they hate or want to bash gamblers, womanizers, or others who engage in behavior which they may find morally objectionable. They have sincere moral objections to this behavior.

    My position has always been that I don’t care if you hate me or object to my “lifestyle”. I’m never going to change your mind nor do I want to try. Just let me live my life and vice versa. I think there are many people of all political perusions who fall into this category. They are not “haters” or “bashers”. However, when you start tinkering with the Federal Constitution or a State’s Constitution that deprives me of my civil rights and/or you get out and VOTE for these things, then that is quite a different story than the Democratic Party’s frequent benign neglect.

    You know what? I find the behavior of most of the Republican representatives to be sincerely morally objectionable. Their behavior is clearly affecting my marriage. I think I’d like to pass a constitutional amendment forbidding “marriage or the incidents thereof” to be given to Republicans.

    Does that make me a hater? After all, it’s a choice, isn’t it? They could just become Democrats and then get married, you know?

    RE: Outing – I’m not a big fan, especially as people being pulled from the closet make miserable role models. However, people who are actively supporting anti-gay legislation (GOP or Dem) and make anti-gay public pronouncements are dangerous hypocrites and therefore fair game.

  44. 44
    Punchy says:

    OMG, How could I have never seen it before—the box wine should have been my first clue!

    That, and the admitted dearth of beer drinking, and the pet cat…

  45. 45
    jaime says:

    I thought the Right loved McCarthy?

  46. 46
    ThymeZone says:

    it sends the message that I think there is something wrong with being gay.

    But … according to Darrell, there is. Darrell says that it is not safe to send our kids camping with gays.

    That’s why people are “wary” of them and afraid of them.

  47. 47
    Richard 23 says:

    Sal, Riehl World View has a “Natalee Holloway” section. I think that alone speaks to its importance!

  48. 48
    Steve says:

    Glenn Greenwald, to my knowledge, was not openly gay. If I am wrong about that, I stand corrected. Even if he was openly gay, I fail to see why the sexual orientation of a blogger refutes his postions on terrorism and the law, and I fail to see why a mean-spirited attack on him that borders on obsession is excusable.

    Essentially, after the wingnuts spent a whole gloating about their discovery of Greenwald’s orientation, Greenwald made a post that said “look, I’ve never hidden it, so what’s the big deal.” The fact that they did not, in hindsight, “out” him really doesn’t change the fact that they intended to out him.

    It’s hard to read posts like this one and this one and not feel like Darrell is denying the existence of a pretty clear anti-homosexual perspective that’s out there.

  49. 49
    ThymeZone says:

    I thought the Right loved McCarthy?

    But that was Charlie McCarthy.

  50. 50
    Matt says:

    Can’t we just say,
    Mike Rogers = Jerk
    Dan Riehl = Jerk
    Greenwald & Cole = obv teh gay.

  51. 51
    Steve says:

    Greenwald & Cole = obv teh gay.

    O RLY?

  52. 52
    John D. says:

    O RLY?

    Jeez Steve, what’s next? An “All Your Base” reference?

  53. 53
    Pb says:

    Dems definitely play the hypocrite on this issue. Clinton passed DOMA as one of his weasly triangulation efforts.

    I’m not sure about that. Actually, although most liberals or progressives are for gay marriage, most Democrats are still against gay marriage, especially Southern Democrats, so I’m not about to assume anything about Clinton’s ‘real’ position here, nor will I condemn him for taking a position that a majority of Democrats would take.

  54. 54
    ThymeZone says:

    It’s hard to read posts like this one and this one and not feel like Darrell is denying the existence of a pretty clear anti-homosexual perspective that’s out there.

    He’s not, in fact he has said quite the opposite.

    He has stated that “most people” agree that it is not safe to send kids camping with gays, and therefore, public wariness of gays is perfectly alright.

    He himself, of course, has never stated that He thinks this, but you know, that’s Darrell. Actually describing his own view and taking onwership ofif would require at least a molecule of integrity on his part.

  55. 55
    Bruce Moomaw says:

    Note that the really loathsome thing about Riehl’s post on Greenwald was that he SNEERED at Greenwald for being gay (up to and including the implication that most gays are child molesters). I’d say he was being outrageously dishonest to say that he just MENTIONED Greenwald’s homosexuality, if it wasn’t that — from what I’ve seen of him — he lacks the brains needed by any conscious organism to be deliberately dishonest. As with Darrell, actually arguing with this buffoon is just a waste of your time, John.

  56. 56
    Punchy says:

    The Democrats don’t care that Craig is gay, they would care that he is gay and closeted and voting on anti-gay measures. The Republicans, on the other hand, care that he is gay BECAUSE they have a problem (publically, for political reason, but not privately, as the gay-bashing is just a charade) with him being gay

    Wow, Sir Cole, you fucking NAILED it. NICE….

  57. 57

    I also think, as I have stated repeatedly, that I think it is wrong that Craig was outed, just as I felt it was wrong that Mary Cheney’s sexual orientation was brought up in 2004.

    I had not realized Mary Cheney was in the closet.

  58. 58
    Pb says:

    Depends on how short and well maintained that beard is.

    Generally not very, on both counts (if it is, then I would generally blame/thank my fiancée, but that’d just give the whole game away, wouldn’t it…)

  59. 59
    John D. says:

    Actually, although most liberals or progressives are for gay marriage, most Democrats are still against gay marriage

    Actually, the Pew report doesn’t say that. I don’t know if we can get an accurate breakdown of (D) identification in the various subgroups, but given that you find this in the report (under the definition of Liberal Democrats):

    BASIC DESCRIPTION: This group has nearly doubled in proportion since 1999. Liberal Democrats now comprise the largest share of Democrats. They are the most opposed to an assertive foreign policy, the most secular, and take the most liberal views on social issues such as homosexuality, abortion, and censorship. They differ from other Democratic groups in that they are strongly pro-environment and pro-immigration.

    …it could very well be a majority of Democrats favor gay marriage. I can’t say with assurance either way.

  60. 60
    LLeo says:

    The Other Steve:
    I gotta admit, it’s an issue that I don’t really care about.

    Whether or not same-sex marriage is made legal one make an iota of difference in our culture. Even symbolically, it is weak.

    However, ever since I was a boy, it burned my soul everytime some group of bullies tried to belittle and ostracize anyone outside some bullshit definition of “the Normal”. Everyone knows that the bullies never stop until someone slams a fist into their face.

    I defend gay right, not cuz I have sympathies for the rug-munchers and rump-rangers of the world; I defend gay rights because We The People have all rights not granted to the Federal Government nor prohibited to the States. I defend gay rights cuz if we don’t stop the bullies, they will interpret apathy as encouragement and whatever peccadillo you or I have will be next on their list. America will NEVER be moral ENOUGH for the Religious Right.

  61. 61
    ThymeZone says:

    I had not realized Mary Cheney was in the closet.

    Oh yes, her marketing of Coors beer to gays was just a cover for being gay.

    After graduating from Colorado College, Cheney went to work as a gay community liaison for Coors Brewing Company, where she was instrumental in ending a 20-year boycott by the gay community of that company. Cheney left Coors in 2000 to work with her father and the Bush campaign. In 2002, Mary Cheney served on the advisory board of the Republican Unity Coalition, a gay-straight alliance formed within the Republican party to help increase tolerance within the party for gays and lesbians, and others.

    Cheney currently receives a paycheck of $2,776 every two weeks, for her role as the head of her father’s campaign team. Mary Cheney remains close to her family by all accounts, and has been off limits to reporters throughout the same-sex marriage debate.

    She was never out. What made you think that?

  62. 62
    Shalimar says:

    I felt it was wrong that Mary Cheney’s sexual orientation was brought up in 2004.

    Do you really want to open up that discussion again? Kerry and Edwards didn’t out Mary Cheney. She previously held a job as GLBT co-ordinator for a major corporation, is it possible to be more out than that? When your opponent’s party has made gay-bashing their primary GOTV strategy, why is it wrong to point out they don’t apply that same homophobia to their own children?

  63. 63
    Steve says:

    What’s ironic is that, at the end of the day, when same-sex marriage is finally legalized (and you’re a fool if you think it will never happen), it’s the Republicans who will earn the lion’s-share of the credit for making it happen. Gay marriage was always a left-wing agenda item, the sort of thing mainstream Dems would never touch with a ten-foot pole. The only reason it’s on the national agenda is because the GOP decided to exploit it as a wedge issue. This was undoubtedly good politics in the short term, but in the long term people who never would have thought about it otherwise are going to be like “Well, heck yeah, why shouldn’t everyone be equal?” So thanks for that, GOP.

  64. 64

    She was never out. What made you think that?

    John saying it was wrong to mention it.

    The debate in 2004 centered quite a bit on the gay bashing of the GOP. I don’t understand how anybody could say it was unreasonable for John Kerry to point out the hypocrisy inherent in that ploy.

    But then, I guess I don’t suffer from having to justify to myself why I thought John Kerry was a lout.

  65. 65
    Pb says:

    John D.,

    Actually, the Pew report doesn’t say that.

    Actually, it does. Of course, you’re free to run the numbers yourself, but I have; I’m pretty familiar with it.

  66. 66
    Punchy says:

    They differ from other Democratic groups in that they are strongly pro-environment and pro-immigration.

    I call shenaningans.

    Very few people in this country are “pro-immigration”. What most progressives are, is “realistic immigration”. Nobody’s in favor of an open border; however, many of us understand the infeasibility of trying to toss out 11 mill illegals all at once. So, maybe if “pro” means “anti immediate mass-chuck”, then OK. Otherwise, nobody wants undocumented Canucks serving them Whoppers and fries.

  67. 67
    LLeo says:

    Pb:

    …nor will I condemn him for taking a position that a majority of Democrats would take.

    I would. I smoke, I drink, I like porn (which conflicts with my distain for fake boobies), and I gamble (poker really). I know I am on the hit list of every moralist left or right. If I don’t stand for other peoples rights, then mine will be forfeit.

  68. 68
    Steve says:

    FYI, it’s pretty tootin’ obvious from John’s choice of words that he knows Mary Cheney wasn’t closeted. That still doesn’t mean he can’t believe it was rude to bring it up.

    In any event, the whole incident goes down in history right next to Coretta Scott King’s funeral – Republicans trying to score political points by accusing Democrats of, horror of horrors, trying to score political points.

  69. 69
    Andrew says:

    I think everyone is horribly misreading Dan Riehl’s post.

    That’s just how closeted homosexual Republican bloggers ask each other out on a date.

    After they eat dinner at a manly sports bar and maintain a large interpersonal distance in public, Dan and John will retire to their fabulously decorated apartment to compare assless chaps (chaps are assless by definition, by the way) and their Cindy Sheehan tattoos.

    Next week, expect an angry rant by Jonah Goldberg about Jeff Goldstein’s weak support for anti-bestiality sodomy laws (this is a marriage proposal).

  70. 70
    Mike S says:

    It looks like this fool used to be quite popular. One year ago he would get 1,440,000 page views per month. Now he gets about 150,000 a month.

    Does that make him the Erik Estrada of the internet?

  71. 71
    Davebo says:

    For what it’s worth John. In France you can get some outstanding table wines sold in milk cartons.

    But that doesn’t mean your gay, not that anything is wrong with that, as to your “frenchiness” the jury is still out.

  72. 72
    ThymeZone says:

    I don’t understand how anybody could say it was unreasonable for John Kerry to point out the hypocrisy inherent in that ploy.

    Why, Lynne Cheney told us: It was a private matter. How dare he try to politicize it?

  73. 73
  74. 74
    ThymeZone says:

    Aw come on fellas, let’s just have everyone … except Darrell … slip off their shorts and get comfortable.

    Can’t we all just get along?

  75. 75
    Pb says:

    LLeo,

    If I don’t stand for other peoples rights, then mine will be forfeit.

    And I wouldn’t condemn you for that either, of course. Stand up for what you believe.

  76. 76
    Bruce Moomaw says:

    The only thing Kerry did wrong was being a bit fuzzy in his wording and not pointing out that she was entirely public about her lesbianism and that her (otherwise appalling) parents did not feel the slightest bit ashamed of her — and shouldn’t. Kerry, however, being Kerry, managed to do the whole thing clumsily enough for the eager GOP spin doctors to pounce — in part because he didn’t quite want to take that step of actually saying publicly that he thought homosexuality was not a significant sin (or explaining why he thought it wasn’t). Kerry was no lout, but this slipup of his was just further proof that the man is not nearly as Swift as his Boat.

  77. 77
    Pb says:

    Why, Lynne Cheney told us: It was a private matter. How dare he try to politicize it?

    Heh. He didn’t, she did. It wasn’t private in the VP debate, mind you.

  78. 78
    Face says:

    After they eat dinner at a manly sports bar and maintain a large interpersonal distance in public, Dan and John will retire to their fabulously decorated apartment to compare assless chaps (chaps are assless by definition, by the way) and their Cindy Sheehan tattoos.

    Next week, expect an angry rant by Jonah Goldberg about Jeff Goldstein’s weak support for anti-bestiality sodomy laws (this is a marriage proposal).

    This is DAMN funny. The tattoo line caused a me to deposit a fine mist of Coke on my keyboard. It’ll be only hours before my “enter” key gets stuck. Thanks, jerk.

  79. 79
    Shalimar says:

    Ok, is it a coincidence Riehl has had twice-normal visitorship in the last hour after you posted a link to his site? And is it wrong if most of his visitors are only there to see the idiocy firsthand?

  80. 80
    John D. says:

    Actually, it does. Of course, you’re free to run the numbers yourself, but I have; I’m pretty familiar with it.

    It must be in a different portion of the report, then, since the subgroups are broken down by party affiliation but the party is not broken down by subgroup. By that I mean that the group “Liberals” is shown as “PARTY ID: 59% Democrat; 40% Independent/No Preference, 1% Republican (92% Dem/Lean Dem)”, but that tells us nothing about how many Democrats fall into that group. So I can’t look at the 80% favoring gay marriage in that group and express it as a percentage of Democrats in total.

    That’s why I said I can’t say with assurance either way.

  81. 81
    Bruce Moomaw says:

    In future years, John, when the Dems are in control of Congress and you’re back to yelling that liberals are destructive dimwits, just remember: we’ll always have 2006.

  82. 82
    Andrei says:

    This is offtopic, my apologies.

    For more than a year now, a few us of commentors on this site have been asking — ok, blasting / slamming / harranguing / insert insult here — John to directly rebut Darrell’s comments or framing of an issue. More often than not, Darrell’s comments ultimately resulted in a queered thread that served no purpose except to annoy everyone involved.

    Today, John Cole did that. He refuted Darrell’s comment directly in the comments section. Maybe he’s done it before, but this is the first time I’ve seen it. And as a result Darrell didn’t queer the thread. (So far.)

    Wow. If this actually works, I think the corner may finally have been turned. And I say cheers to that! Maybe once the snark from the liberal commentators wears off at all the giddyness they feel from the blood in the water they smell for next month’s election, then this site might actually return to being the place in the political blogosphere where center-left and center-right can actually debate issues, even if a little heatedly.

    That would be teh rox0r.

  83. 83
    Perry Como says:

    After they eat dinner at a manly sports bar and maintain a large interpersonal distance in public, Dan and John will retire to their fabulously decorated apartment to compare assless chaps (chaps are assless by definition, by the way) and their Cindy Sheehan tattoos.

    Riehl Sticky Goo

  84. 84
    Pb says:

    John D.,

    It must be in a different portion of the report, then, since the subgroups are broken down by party affiliation but the party is not broken down by subgroup.

    Yes, although they generally do quantify the Independents as Dem/Lean Dem and Rep/Lean Rep, and show the overall percentages of which subgroup voted for which Presidential candidate in 2004. Also if you look at the Demographics, you’ll note that there are actually more Independents in the Liberal group than there are in the other Democratic groups (even though they’re all 90+% Dem/Lean Dem). Also, it is possible to download *all* the data they used, they’ve made it available…

  85. 85
    srv says:

    Wow. If this actually works, I think the corner may finally have been turned.

    We are just one Friedman Unit from turning the corner on defeating Darrell.

    Just like Bush is calling Iraq Vietnam now. He and Tony are making allusions to the Tet Offensive. Are we all going to go wishy washy now, just when we’re on the cusp of (or a few Friedman Units from) total victory? You see, what’s been going on the last 3 years is just the equivalent of Tet.

    Couldn’t we just have Stallone make a new Rambo and declare Iraq a victory?

  86. 86
    MAX HATS says:

    John Cole is now my favorite Gay Blogger.

    Sullivan’s been slipping. Don’t care about his fucking book, don’t care about the fucking Pet Shop Boys.

  87. 87
    Pb says:

    John D.,

    Ok, I loaded up the data and crunched it for you, and yes, I was right. Self-identified registered Democrats on the question:

    Q.36 Do you strongly favor, favor, oppose, or strongly oppose […]
    b. Allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally

    7% – Don’t Know
    17.7% – Strongly Favor
    21.4% – Favor
    21.1% – Oppose
    32.7% – Strongly Oppose

    Also, keep in mind that this is for 2004; I’ll let you pore over the earlier Pew surveys.

  88. 88
    Davebo says:

    Just an FYI John.

    Reihl has another post on this subject up.

    Why did you kill his poor gay brother?

    ;0)

    Seriously, the guy should seek help.

  89. 89
    Krista says:

    And by the way- if anyone wants to know whether I am gay or straight or bi or whatever, the answer is simple- it is none of your God damned business.

    You’re such a tease.

    My view on the whole gay marriage thing is: of COURSE it should be legal. Marriage is only as sacred and stable as each individual couple makes it. If your marriage is in danger because couples you don’t even know are also getting married, then your marriage wasn’t worth shit to begin with, friends.

  90. 90
    Pb says:

    The number one threat to marriage in this country: divorce. I’m still waiting for the GOP to outlaw that one… what, no Constitutional amendment to defend the sanctity of marriage from divorce?

  91. 91
    HyperIon says:

    Look, it’s obvious, isn’t it? Glenn Greenwald is a bad person and is gay, and being gay is bad, so it’s OK to call him gay. On the other hand, Larry Craig is not a bad person, so whether or not he’s gay, you can’t say he is because that would be an insult.

    exactly. and this explanation works for Mary Cheney, too!

    some people grew up being taught that queers have cooties, just like i was taught that black folks and jews have cooties. my father didn’t teach me to literally bash them, instead he just conveyed the idea that i should STAY AWAY from these cootified people. because they are NOT like us normal people.

    what bothers a lot of folks is that they can’t know for sure if someone is homosexual just by looking/listening. Rock Hudson was a revelation to them. so they can’t know if they should stay away. and this is deeply disturbing to them.

    BTW i was NOT taught that queers had cooties because to acknowledge something as obviously perverted/disgusting as queerness would have caused my father’s head to explode.

    oh, the vagaries of homphobia.

  92. 92
    ThymeZone says:

    He refuted Darrell’s comment directly in the comments section

    As John Cole stands up to Darrell, our forces can stand down?

  93. 93
    ThymeZone says:

    All I did was half-jokingly call you a name you earned

    Riehl is obviously a deranged butthead.

    I’d ignore him.

  94. 94
    ThymeZone says:

    what, no Constitutional amendment to defend the sanctity of marriage from divorce?

    Apparently, “What God has joined, let no man put asunder” just doesn’t mean much any more.

    The Party of Values has become the Party of Broken Homes. The Party of Fatherless Children. The Party of No Health Care for Families. The Party of their Rich Friends.

    The Party of Fuck You.

  95. 95
    DougJ says:

    Hey, I’m sorry to hear about Dave Riehl’s brother, to be serious for a minute. Somehow I can’t get in the spirit of trashing him after hearing about that.

    Although I do think he’s completely wrong here.

  96. 96
    John Cole says:

    Of course it is a tragedy that he had a brother die, alone, with no contact with his family. That is not something I wish on anyone.

    Doesn’t excuse him for being a deranged bigot and homophobe, as well as just a vile puke. Hopefully he will bore with me and all my c***s****** friends and commenters and get back to the important business of finding Natalie Holloway.

  97. 97
    Steve says:

    Well, it’s a shame about his brother, that’s for sure. It still baffles me that he thinks Democrats are the party that wants to stigmatize gays and exclude them from society, but he’s entitled to his opinion.

  98. 98
    Mona says:

    The proprietor of this right-wing blog, GOP4ME, in comments at Riehl’s says:

    John Cole has always been a Trotskyite RINO anyway. If he’s gay, it wouldn’t surprise anyone. We should send him somewhere along with the rest of those perverts. I’m sick of them contaminating America.

    Shall we hear some more about that nasty, uncivil, angry left?

    And John, how and when did you cath teh ghey?

  99. 99
    Jane Finch says:

    Well cripes, John…how dare you! Next thing, Michelle Malkin will lead the charge against you for the persecution of Dan R. and the entire right blogosphere will be in a tizzy over the newest example of how they are oppressed by homo liberals.

    My advice: kill the cat, dump the wine, and bulk up….otherwise they’ll be calling you “Jennifer”…kind of like the oh-so-clever “GiGi”.

  100. 100
    Andrew says:

    I bet his brother was hit by a car or something.

    It might have been a gay car, or something, if it was in the Castro, though.

    But let’s keep in mind that the important thing is that he didn’t get married.

  101. 101
    yet another jeff says:

    Yeah, I really feel for his brother, and forgive me, but something in his unhingedness reminds me of that line in the movie “Heathers”. “My son is gay and I love him, I love my dead gay son”.

    Not the snark of mirth, but the snark of seeing a trump card of self-righteousness thrown down on the table.

  102. 102
    Pb says:

    Mona,

    Yeah, but is that GOP4Me guy for Riehl? Err… anyhow, they both sound unbelievable.

  103. 103
    yet another jeff says:

    Sexual McCarthyism? Like Roy Cohn?

  104. 104
    ThymeZone says:

    Sexual McCarthyism? Like Roy Cohn?

    Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency? …

  105. 105
    Steve says:

    Instapundit uses the same term:

    It’s true, of course, that the Democrats are worse, and if you had any doubt about that, the creepy sexual McCarthyism that we’ve seen this week would be proof enough.

    That’s right, friends. Because of Mike Rogers, and various unnamed lefty blogs, we all know exactly how a Democratic majority would behave.

    The Republican electoral strategy has always been to point a finger at the far left and say “you can’t let THOSE people have power!” but their heart really doesn’t seem to be in it this time. However, just to be certain, I think Nancy Pelosi should announce that Mike Rogers will not be getting any committee chairs.

  106. 106
    Too Appalled To Use My Handle says:

    Jesus Christ, that update. Even while draping his dead gay brother as a self-righteous mantle over himself, he uses the most despicable and outright cruel stereotyping language. A little self-reflection is in order for Mr. Riehl, but it’s going to hurt and should probably take place offline. What a horrorshow.

  107. 107
    KC says:

    Man, this is f****** funny to read. Bottom line is that a lot of Republicans are having trouble dealing with all the c*** s****** folks in their party right now.

  108. 108
    Ted says:

    Reihl defends himself against any charge he could possibly be homophobic, and then uses a homophobic slur on John.

    Honestly, it’s a bit like saying, “I have a black step-brother! How dare you call me racist, you n*****!!”

    Him screaming “cock-sucker!!” over and over again reminds of the fictional Colonel Fitz in the movie American Beauty, railing at his son about how he’d rather his son be dead than be one.

    Anyway ladies, take note: Dan Reihl thinks very low of people who suck cock. All of them, apparently.

  109. 109
    BadTux says:

    Back when I was a wee lad in the segregation-era South, statements like Riehl’s were often used to justify segregation laws and resistance to federal desegregation orders. Some fat pasty-skinned red-faced politician sweating in a suit in the Southern heat would get up in front of the crowd, and say something along the lines of, “I ain’t got nuthin’ against niggers, some of my best friends are niggers, but niggers simply gotta know their place!” If he was an exceptionally diplomatic politician, he’d use the word “Negro” instead of “nigger”, but the cheering crowd of white crackers would hear “nigger” anyhow and cheer just as loudly.

    Interesting how today’s Republicans are using almost the exact same phraseology that Southern apologists for segregation used to justify their treatment of blacks in the South. Apparently gays are the new “niggers”, and “their place” is firmly in the closet…

    – Badtux the Southern Penguin

  110. 110
    Mike says:

    So John Cole, it looks pretty official now. The Republican Party (or actually as I prefer to call them, the Rethuglican Leadership and the Republemming adoring masses) doesn’t want you any more. Why don’t you come on over officially and join us Independents? We are tired of the Democraps (fucking DLC) as well, but for now they are going to be a DAMN sight better than the mega-disaster we have now. I think there may still be enough Democrats left to possibly pull the party out of it’s descent, but I have seen too many party line votes on the GOP side to think there are any true Republicans left. I thought Warner, McCain, and Graham might stand up against torture, but when the spineless Democraps wouldn’t support them, they got muscled back into line.

    The CORPORATE party which unfortunately the majority of both parties belong to have already led us nearly into an unbreakable fascist state where the mega corporations collect FAR more information on us than the government does and with FAR fewer constraints. The Democraps being in total control of the government as the Rethugs are now would lead to the same situation, but not quite as quickly.

    The only way to fight it off is to have divided government and more regulation of those corporations. And I honestly think it is too late already, but my reaction is still to fight it. Especially when I see the Democraps vote for torture. Fucking Bastards. I told myself that was the day they pulled the feeding tube from democracy’s dying body.

    I think John Dean’s 30-35% of people (and growing, sadly)who want to go back and give up the Revolutionary War and go back to King George may be the cancer which finally allows the fascist bastards to complete the takeover. Eisenhower warned about the military industrial complex, and it has now nearly completed the slowest motion coup in history.

  111. 111
    Pb says:

    What’s the big deal with cork soakers, anyhow? Is this guy racist, or what?

  112. 112
    SC&A says:

    You seem to be projecting more than a bit, Mr Cole.

    Dan Riehl’s remarks on the ‘politics’ of the matter are more than credible, even you do not agree witgh them. No amount of denial and projection can change that reality.

    Riehl is more mainstream than you are- and that is what scares the hell out of you, because in the end, you can’t make Riehl into anything other than what is- a credible, middle of the road and mainstream American.

    Riehl knows a truth you clearly choose to ignore or deny- that most Americans can and do get along. Every day, all over America, people on either side of the politcal spectrum live next door to each other, share BBQ’s and look out for each other’s kids and really don’t care if or where their neighbors go to worship services or not. Most Americans don’t care about their neighbors sexuality anymore than they care about their hobbies. People manage to get along, civilly and and cordially.

    What scares the hell out of the agendistas of both sides, yourself included, is a truth they and you cannot abide.

    You aren’t relevant. You may be entertaining, Mr Cole, but you aren’t relevant.

  113. 113
    Mona says:

    Anyway ladies, take note: Dan Reihl thinks very low of people who suck cock.

    I find that hard to swallow. ;)

  114. 114
    SeesThroughIt says:

    assless chaps (chaps are assless by definition, by the way)

    Well, yeah, but there’s tremendous comedy inherent to the phrase “assless chaps,” and a lot of it gets lost if you drop the “assless.”

  115. 115
    DougJ says:

    I’m through feeling bad now.

    Clinton had 8 years to deal with the grave threat posed by Larry Craig and did nothing about it. All so that Craig could be outted in October of 2006 just before the election.

    You know why Vince Foster was killed? Because he was about to spill the beans about Larry Craig. And the Clintons wanted to save it up as an October surprise in 2006.

  116. 116
    KC says:

    In case anyone wants to know why they shouldn’t vote Republican this election, aside from the rank gay-hate hypocrisy of course, check this wonderful article out in Rolling Stone. Gawd, these f*ckers are corrupt.

  117. 117
    Too Appalled To Use My Handle says:

    Riehl knows a truth you clearly choose to ignore or deny- that most Americans can and do get along.

    Except for that elder brother who ran away from home and died without his family: he gets to be an object lesson in tragedy and a shield of self-righteousness.

  118. 118
    Sirkowski says:

    Wow, Riehl’s got issues.

  119. 119
    Blue Neponset says:

    LOL. Dan Riehl needs some therapy, maybe a lot.

  120. 120
    Steve says:

    Riehl is more mainstream than you are- and that is what scares the hell out of you, because in the end, you can’t make Riehl into anything other than what is- a credible, middle of the road and mainstream American.

    Yeah, that’s what they do in mainstream America – run up and down Main Street yelling C***S***** at each other. Oh man, you guys crack me up, constantly imagining that hundreds of millions of Americans are just like you.

  121. 121
    Krista says:

    My advice: kill the cat, dump the wine, and bulk up….

    Jane, I presume this is dating advice for John? Maybe I’m a weird woman, but cat-killing is a bit of a turnoff. It’s right up there with bad oral hygeine.

  122. 122

    Riehl is more mainstream than you are- and that is what scares the hell out of you, because in the end, you can’t make Riehl into anything other than what is- a credible, middle of the road and mainstream American.

    Ok, ignoring the bizaree moonbatty psychosis…

    This is an interesting phenomena. Two years ago the Republicans were willing to push gays out of the country if they thought it could get them votes. Now that they’ve got some sort of problem with teh gays all over their Congress, they are suddenly declaring they are the champions of teh gays.

    Steve is right up above, we’re going to have gay marriage and it’s going to be the Republicans responsible.

    Why?

    Because at the rate we’re going, by next week Bush is going to be demanding Congress legalize it, just so he can run away from this latest scandal.

    Funniest thing I’ve ever seen. Seriously. I mean this takes the cake.

  123. 123
  124. 124
    Andrei says:

    Riehl is more mainstream than you are- and that is what scares the hell out of you, because in the end, you can’t make Riehl into anything other than what is- a credible, middle of the road and mainstream American.

    SC&A, if you think posts like the ones Riehl authors are “credible” or “middle of the road” then you are seriously fucked in the head.

  125. 125
    CaseyL says:

    Anyone who thinks Democrats are more bigoted than Republicans, esp. on issues affecting gay people, is either disingenuous or an imbecile.

    Anyone who can’t distinguish between people who prey on kids (including teenagers) and people who have consensual affairs with adults, is either disingenuous or an imbecile.

    The modern GOP, and particularly its braying Yahoos in the blogosphere, is so dishonest they wouldn’t know intellectual integrity if it walked up to them and coldcocked them. (Pun intended)

    The Right Blogosphere has become deeply irrelevant. They can whip their dwindling membership up into a frothing rage over trivia, and they can repeat the most brazen untruths until their brains turn into tapioca.

    What they can’t do is control the nation’s political agenda anymore.

    They peaked with “Rathergate.” It’s been downhill to irrelevancy ever since. No wonder they’re flailing, and no wonder they’re getting more frenzied in their paranoia, rage and hatred. Paranoia, rage and hatred is all they have.

  126. 126
    Tsulagi says:

    Came back, saw the update, then went over to Riehl’s World View for another healthy serving. Gee, that little rant there was special.

    I was in the middle of writing a comment over there on his conservative and family values, but I deleted it before posting. I think mom would be proud. Because all snark aside, that guy’s glue is coming undone.

    Upthread, I liked SC&A’s visual of a bucolic slice of Americana. Kids frolicking at sunny barbeque picnics while neighbors smile approvingly looking out for each other.

    Compare that to Riehl’s warm fuzzy family. Essentially “Yeah, I had a 56 year-old brother I hadn’t seen since I was 15 and don’t care. Somewhere along the line I found out he was gay. He likely died alone in some SF gay flophouse rotting from AIDS. Fuck ‘em.”

    Also liked his reasoning why he’s against gay marriage: gays don’t procreate. So I guess once a woman hits menopause no reason to be married to that bitch, right? So much for mom and apple pie. He also doesn’t like a nanny state, I guess unless it serves the purpose of making sure gays don’t marry.

    You could go on with his shit in that post, but it begs the question: Where is the GOP getting these retards?

  127. 127
  128. 128
    Gold Star for Robot Boy says:

    What a meltdown – and preserved for eternity, thanks to the Internet!

    Except for that elder brother who ran away from home and died without his family: he gets to be an object lesson in tragedy and a shield of self-righteousness.

    That struck me, too.

    I say probably because it was the last address I ever had for him from letters exchanged, not having seen the boy/man since I was about 15.

    Note that Dan doesn’t say a word about his brother after he’s done with that mention.
    Questions for Dan (becuse we all know he’s reading):
    Why did Robert run away? (And why to San Francisco?) If his departure stemmed from strife within the family, was it over his sexuality?
    What did you, as a 15-year-old, think about this dramatic turn of events?
    You acknowledge there wasn’t much contact between you and your brother. Did anyone in your family keep in touch with him?
    Finally, any regrets over how it all played out? If so, over what?

  129. 129
    capelza says:

    Dan Riehl is some serious crazy…wow.

  130. 130
    SC&A says:

    Andrei, your remark is profoundly stupid. Do you have aanything credible to add?

    Other Steve- Personally, I gon’t care one way or the other about gay marriage. That said, the issue is not relevant to the discussion at hand. Are you implying that I am wrong and that most Americans do not get along and are at each other’s throats? If so, based on what evidence?

    Tsulagi, while we probably are not on the same side of the political aisle, I can see- and concur on your poiont re gay marriage.

    Still, Riehl’s- or anyone elses’s- family situation is not meant to be anything other than a personal experience.

    While it is easy to take the ‘cheap shot,’ there is hardly a family- in politics or without, liberal or conservative, that hasn’t a few episodes they wish they could make go away. Would it be fair to extrapolate political implications from those episodes?

  131. 131
    Krista says:

    Riehl is more mainstream than you are- and that is what scares the hell out of you, because in the end, you can’t make Riehl into anything other than what is- a credible, middle of the road and mainstream American.

    This is not the Right’s shame, no matter how you’ll try to make it so. It is the Left’s disgrace. I called you a c***S***** because of the weak-kneed lip service you are providing to your most repugnant cronies on the Left. Whether or not you derive some sexual gratification from giving them that service, I couldn’t care less.

    Balloon Juice? Give me a break. Don’t look now, John, but I think the balloon exploded and the juice is running from your lips. Here’s hoping you enjoyed, it c***s*****.

    That is mainstream America?

  132. 132
    SC&A says:

    Krista, Dan Riehl is rather tame.

    I can direct you to some of the most vile, hateful, racist and anti semitic posts- all published by mainstream leftist bloggers.

  133. 133

    […] All I know, is you conservatives are all a bunch of mean bastards, the biggest bunch of raving slavering gay bashers around, I can barely type qwerty without overwriting an enormous pile of gay bashing hate fill screed. Hell, I even have a “I HATE gays” hot button set up on my keyboard. Yeah, we conservatives are just gay hatin’ bastards, and because of that very fact the extremely principled independent conservative who hates conservatives, John Cole, is going to love voting Democratic this year in retaliation for your nastiness you gay haters. […]

  134. 134
    John Cole says:

    That is a precious bunch of silliness Al.

  135. 135
    capelza says:

    SC&A…you got banned by Glenn? Are you one of the anonymous he said he would ban, because there were too many? If Bart and Shooter are allowed to stay, I can’t imagine what you said to get banned.

    You think you get Chappaquidick in that post at least once more?

  136. 136
    Too Appalled To Use My Handle says:

    He died alone, probably of aids for all I know and probably in a San Francisco flop house living on the government’s dime.

    And on the government’s dime. One would infer from this that Riehl would rather his brother had died on the street.

    This is “rather tame”? You don’t do Riehl’s feelings–careening in all directions though they might be–justice.

  137. 137
    Andrei says:

    Andrei, your remark is profoundly stupid. Do you have aanything credible to add?

    Besides claiming that if you think Riehl is “credible” or “middle of the road” then you are seriously fucked in the head?

    Um… nope. You got me there!

  138. 138
    Steve says:

    I can direct you to some of the most vile, hateful, racist and anti semitic posts- all published by mainstream leftist bloggers.

    Personally, the most vile, hateful, racist and anti-semitic stuff I’ve ever seen comes from outfits like the KKK, the American Nazi Party, the Council of Conservative Citizens, the Aryan Brotherhood…

    But that’s just me. Tell you what, go back to your echo chamber and clutch your pearls a little while longer over Jane Hamsher’s use of blackface, cause you know, there’s no worse racism in America than what you’ll find in the lefty blogosphere. Uh huh.

  139. 139
    Krista says:

    I can direct you to some of the most vile, hateful, racist and anti semitic posts- all published by mainstream leftist bloggers.

    Would you also call them credible and middle-of-the-road?

    I don’t think you’re wrong in that the majority of Americans are just going about their day-to-day lives and are not particularly concerned with much beyond that. I’m not really sure what on earth your point has to do with the debate in question, however.

    At any rate, I do think that outing is a pretty scuzzy practice. I also, however, think that it’s very ill-advised for closeted gay politicians to support policies that negatively impact the human rights of gays. And I think it’s downright scummy for politicians on either side of the fence (although it does seem to be a predominantly right-wing argument), to engender doubt and fear in the populace by telling them that the institution of marriage is under attack, because of gays wanting to marry. As I said earlier, marriage is only as sacred as each couple makes it, and for people to deny marriage to another couple because they are scared of how it might impact their marriage, is utterly selfish.

  140. 140
    capelza says:

    He died alone, probably of aids for all I know and probably in a San Francisco flop house living on the government’s dime.

    I think the small minded assholes Mr. Riehl is talking about are likely to be found a bit closer to home than he cares to admit. Like I saig before…some kind of crazy.

  141. 141
    Steve says:

    Dick Cheney has a 20% approval rating. And yet every one of those 20% will tell you that they speak for the majority of America. Yep, good, solid, mainstream Americans, like Rush Limbaugh for example.

    Funny, ain’t it.

  142. 142
  143. 143

    Other Steve- Personally, I gon’t care one way or the other about gay marriage. That said, the issue is not relevant to the discussion at hand. Are you implying that I am wrong and that most Americans do not get along and are at each other’s throats? If so, based on what evidence?

    That’s a very good question.

    I talk to my neighbors all the time.

    And I’m not aware of any of them calling me a cork soaker. Maybe this is how things are in your neck of the woods, and maybe since you think it’s normal you do not equate it with people being at each others throats.

    That being said, we sometimes do call our neighbors delusional maroons. I hope you don’t mind.

  144. 144

    Dick Cheney has a 20% approval rating. And yet every one of those 20% will tell you that they speak for the majority of America. Yep, good, solid, mainstream Americans, like Rush Limbaugh for example.

    I don’t think that’s fair. Dick Cheney’s popularity fluctuates wildly based on whether people prefer salting or peppering.

  145. 145
    Andrei says:

    I can direct you to some of the most vile, hateful, racist and anti semitic posts- all published by mainstream leftist bloggers.

    Whoop-di-fucking-do. So you can cite evidence that assholes exist regardless of partisanship.

    Your point is?

    You made the claim that Dan Riehl is “middle of the road.” How in the world is someone who write articles with titles like:

    National Dems Finance Radio Hatchet Job
    The Bigoted Left
    A Priceless Moment In Moonbat Blogging History
    Pelosi-phobia Mountz
    Liberal Burial Ground Unearthed
    Harry Reid’s House Of Cards Coming Down
    The War Crime In Jim Webb’s Past

    …even REMOTELY close to anything meant by “middle of the road.”

    Thanks for playing!

  146. 146
    norbizness says:

    By the way, we are now running an sickeningly high asterisk deficit with the Chinese.

  147. 147
    Richard 23 says:

    That was an older brother of mine, John. He’s dead and, yes, he was Gay. You want to know how he died? He died alone, probably of aids for all I know and probably in a San Francisco flop house living on the government’s dime.

    Sounds like he really loved his brother. San Francisco. Flop house. Probably of AIDS. Government’s dime. If only he’d spent his own dime to find his own brother. Riehlly.

  148. 148
    Richard 23 says:

    Oh, and Dan Riehl is a c***s*****. Crak Smoker?

  149. 149
    vetiver says:

    Oh, and Dan Riehl is a c***s*****. Crak Smoker?

    Clog Smiter! Shield thy Crocs and Danskos from his almighty rage!

    I do encourage you all to visit the Dead Gay Brother memorial thread. Otherwise you’ll miss out on Phoenix’s “Ballad of a Clueless Centrist Who Thinks Meter Means Parking.”

    *SPOILER ALERT* — here’s the final couplet:

    Me? I’m a cocksucker and in its goo I wallow.
    But John…. You got goo going that I can’t swallow.

    Priceless.

  150. 150
    Richard 23 says:

    One thing that really stood out for me in that Reihlly weak rant was what Ann Coulter said about the Jersey Girls. That he is attempting to use “I love my dead gay [son/brother]” line to deflect criticism of his undefendable posistions.

    I mean really, how can you criticize Dan for anything he has ever said since he has a dead gay brother he hasn’t seen since he was 15? Now I can no longer in good conscience support the right, erm, privilege, of gay people to marry or have civil unions. Because his brother died, right?

    Not that I agree with Ann Coulter, but that it struck me as ironic somehow.

    I can direct you to some of the most vile, hateful, racist and anti semitic posts- all published by mainstream leftist bloggers.

    Please do, I’m bored tonight.

  151. 151
    Steve says:

    Yeah, well um, I’m pretty sure none of us would be so vile as to suggest Riehl enjoys his brother’s death.

  152. 152
    yet another jeff says:

    One thing that really stood out for me in that Reihlly weak rant was what Ann Coulter said about the Jersey Girls. That he is attempting to use “I love my dead gay [son/brother]” line to deflect criticism of his undefendable posistions.

    Well…did he say he loved his dead gay brother…or just that he has a dead gay brother?

  153. 153
    Shalimar says:

    Yeah, well um, I’m pretty sure none of us would be so vile as to suggest Riehl enjoys his brother’s death.

    Of course not, but I do think it’s extremely unusual that he knows the date of death but doesn’t have any idea how or where. I can give the how and where off the top of my head for every close relative of mine who has died but have to look up most of the dates.

  154. 154

    I wonder if the concept of: all law abiding Americans have the same rights, privileges and responsibilities, has a problem? oh well…

    I’m confused – the left is indulging in sexual McCarthyism? I thought maybe the left was doing Hypocrite McCarthyism.

  155. 155
    Quiddity says:

    I’m enjoying this. Not that I like to see John Cole get insulted, but the crazyness of the attacks coupled with Cole’s sharp remarks makes it highly entertaining.

    Not just with this blog spat, but throughout the nation, the level of the attacks has dropped to new lows recently. Lowest in my lifetime. And yet I keep waiting for everybody to calm down and for somebody (the MSM?) to enforce adult behavior. But that never happens.

  156. 156
    Pablo says:

    “Quite a change I have gone through in just a few short years- ardent conservative to homo liberal.”

    It’s been interesting to watch, I must say.

  157. 157

    […] Wow! There’s quite the brouhaha going on between John Cole at Balloon-Juice and Dan Riehl. John notes (and I think correctly): overt homophobia and the sickness…is Riehl’s mindset. I am sure Dobson and Rove love it. But can we please end the charade- conservative oppostion to Gay marriage and homosexual rights may be, in the minds of a few, about protecting traditional marriage. But in the minds of many, it is just like Dan Riehl- a knee-jerk reaction to fear. to which Riehl responds: That was an older brother of mine, John. He’s dead and, yes, he was Gay. You want to know how he died? He died alone, probably of aids for all I know and probably in a San Francisco flop house living on the government’s dime. I say probably because it was the last address I ever had for him from letters exchanged, not having seen the boy/man since I was about 15. […]

  158. 158

    By the way, we are now running an sickeningly high asterisk deficit with the Chinese.

    Yeah, but it’s not like that matters or anything.

  159. 159
    ImJohnGalt says:

    What’s with the John Cole trademark symbol in that trackback up there? Do we have to pay royalties every time we use your name, John?

  160. 160
    Darrell says:

    John Cole tries to minimize and excuse the outing of a gay Republican because according to him, based on the history of Repubs, they pretty much deserved it. In other words, it was wrong, but he can’t get worked up over it because of the Repubs opposition to gay marriage. etc.. oops, last Dem Presidential candidate advocated the same position on gay marriage.

    Cole has repeatedly chastised Repubs for saying ‘Dems would be worse’ if they are given more legislative power. Yet he does the exact same thing, minimizing and excusing what the Dems did in outing Craig..

    “Well, it was wrong and all for Dems to out Craig, but I can’t really condemn it because REPUBLICANS ARE WORSE”. Irony it getting pretty thick around here.

  161. 161
    merlallen says:

    The Democrats don’t HAVE a presidential candidate, yet. So how did this fictional person oppose gay marriage?

  162. 162
    Darrell says:

    The Democrats don’t HAVE a presidential candidate, yet. So how did this fictional person oppose gay marriage?

    John Kerry, the last Dem presidential candidate, publicly came out against legalization of gay marriage as part of his Presidential campaign. That’s one example why Cole is so off-base to lay this all on the feet of Republicans.. it’s bullshit and he knows it, but it plays to his new pals on the left.

  163. 163
    Geek, Esq. says:

    Give me a break. Don’t look now, John, but I think the balloon exploded and the juice is running from your lips. Here’s hoping you enjoyed, it c***s*****.

    Does Dan Riehl write gay Internet porn on the DL? Reminds me of this Onion story:

    Why Do All These Homosexuals Keep Sucking My Cock?

  164. 164
    Punchy says:

    Geek, that’s one of the funniest Onion articles I’ve read in awhile. Thanks.

  165. 165
    Steve says:

    Wow, Kerry has the “same position” as the Republicans who want to write discrimination into the Constitution… I did not know that

  166. 166
    Redleg says:

    Sounds to me like Riehl is asking for a real ass-whipping. he truth is that bad-asses like Riehl don’t really have the balls to do anything but attack people from behind a computer and firewall. Riehl is the real c***-S***** here.

  167. 167
    Redleg says:

    Darrell,
    But I believe Kerry does support civil unions for gay couples.

    Get a clue.

  168. 168
    Andrei says:

    John Kerry, the last Dem presidential candidate, publicly came out against legalization of gay marriage as part of his Presidential campaign. That’s one example why Cole is so off-base to lay this all on the feet of Republicans.

    Darrell… L2Google

    http://www.ontheissues.org/John_Kerry.htm

    Kerry believes marriage is between a man and woman, whatever that means, but supports civil unions that provide the same rights to gay couples as heterosexual ones.

    We all know nuanced or not so quite black and white positions on an issue are not your forte, but for once, please just give it a try.

  169. 169
    MAX HATS says:

    What a monster. His brother chose to lose contact with him (wonder why?) and ended up dead, and somehow that means Reihl couldn’t possibly be a bigot. Oh, and his brother “probably” died of AIDS, and “probably” was “on the government teat.” Cause that’s just what gays do, I guess. No bigotry here!

    I doubt very much he died alone. He just died away from his family. That was a choice he made, and judging by the spitting hatred and contempt Reihl has for homosexuals, his brother was probably happier that way.

    Just because he obviously needs therapy doesn’t neutralize the immorality. He made the choice that he would rather continue hating homosexuals than loving his brother. Fucking sick.

  170. 170
    MAX HATS says:

    Of course not, but I do think it’s extremely unusual that he knows the date of death but doesn’t have any idea how or where. I can give the how and where off the top of my head for every close relative of mine who has died but have to look up most of the dates.

    In my experience, homosexuals (unfortuantely) often have a story of family who kicked them out or disowned them not for anything they did, but merely for who they loved. This is the first time I’ve heard the account from one of the disowning family members – someone who thinks “cock sucker” is the ultimate insult, someone who doesn’t even know how his brother died (but is sure quick to guess), and someone who thinks he couldn’t possibly hate gays because his brother ran away from him. The face of evil, aka “family values.”

  171. 171
    Nahanni says:

    MAX HATS,

    Um, the only “spitting hatred and contempt” I see for homosexuals is what is spewing forth form the left and the Democratic party.

    But they are good at that, they have nothing but “spitting hatred and contempt” for any and all black people who wander off the “Democratic plantation”.

    They have nothing but “spitting hatred and contempt” for any and all GLBT people who do not goosestep along with the liberals and the Democrats.

    They have nothing but “spitting hatred and contempt” for our servicemen and women. They frequently show it by spitting on them and attacking them and their families.

    They have nothing but “spitting hatred and contempt” for western civilization that has given them all everything they have, and for as much as they despise it they sure are not willing to put their lives where their mouths are and give up their cushy western lifestyle. Guess they don’t want to try for advocating womens’ rights or freedom or “speak truth to power” in Tehran where the mullahs would be more then happy to show them what a “theocratic dictatorship” is really like and what they do to people like them. I will give you a hint-they won’t be giving you lattes, vegan meals and WiFi. No, they will be torturing your ass in the good ol’ mideval way and killing you very slowly and at the end you will beg for death.

    They have nothing but “spitting hatred and contempt” for any and all who have seen what an insane asylum the leftists and the Democratic party have become and walked away.

    They have nothing but “spitting hatred and contempt” for any and all who do not bow down and worship at the altar of Our Transgendered Lady of Liberalism.

    The left and the Democratic party have become what they say they hate so much. They are the ones who are acting like fascists, they are the ones practicing “McCarthyism”, they are the ones who are stifling dissent, they are the racists, the gay baiters, the jew baiters, the women haters.

  172. 172
    MAX HATS says:

    They have nothing but “spitting hatred and contempt” for any and all who do not bow down and worship at the altar of Our Transgendered Lady of Liberalism.

    Okay, you’re insane.

    Leave the house much?

  173. 173
    Bas-O-Matic says:

    The only reason it’s on the national agenda is because the GOP decided to exploit it as a wedge issue.

    It’s more like the Massachusetts Supreme Court dumped the ultimate campaign issue in the Republicans laps in 2004 by declaring that a ban on Gay Marriage violated the Massachusetts constitution.

    They have nothing but “spitting hatred and contempt” for our servicemen and women. They frequently show it by spitting on them and attacking them and their families.

    Just the other day I was spitting on my nephew…

  174. 174
    John D. says:

    They have nothing but “spitting hatred and contempt” for our servicemen and women. They frequently show it by spitting on them and attacking them and their families.

    I keep seeing this, and all I can think is “Say what?”

    I served during the first Gulf War with a metric shitload of Democrats. Even liberal Democrats. Amazingly enough, they were *just like the non-Democrats*.

    Served with honor and distinction. Did a good job. Had pride in their service.

    And you come here and effectively say that they are self-loathing? I never got that vibe from them. I’m far, far more inclined to believe you are bugfuck crazy than to believe that of my brothers and sisters in arms.

    Occam’s Razor, don’tcha know.

  175. 175
    yet another jeff says:

    bow down and worship at the altar of Our Transgendered Lady of Liberalism.

    That’s hot.

  176. 176
    yet another jeff says:

    It make perfect sense…liberals hate teh gay…AND the sanctity of marraige.

    Nahanni, maybe you have a different definition of “spitting hatred and contempt” than most of us? That was a lot of rant but you kind of have that “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing” thing happening.

  177. 177
    mere mortal says:

    I may, when and if some of the ignorance dies down. Right now, I see no reason to put more of my life on display for certain fools incapable of mature discussion, or reason.
    – Posted by: Dan Riehl

    All I did was half-jokingly call you a name you earned. Congratualtions, obviously, it was well deserved [labeling (libeling?) someone a cocksucker].
    – Posted by: Dan Riehl

    …and compares it to a post I did on Glenn aka GiGi Greenwald some time ago, mentioning his homosexuality.
    – Posted by: Dan Riehl

    He died that way because of small minded assholes who think that being Gay in America is a crime.
    – Posted by: Dan Riehl

    How could the same person have posted all of the above? A haphazard fiction writer, or an unspeakable moster? Difficult to be certain, but reflecting on what it portrays as an unjust end of its brother (perhaps it even approved of that end, it does not make itself clear.), it remains sanguine about its casual and hurtful slurs. A vicious, vomitous, disgusting thing. Here’s hoping it is a creation of absurd, inept, unbelievable fiction.
    – Posted by: mere mortal

  178. 178

    […] The fights they pick are not without merit, though it’s sometimes hard to decide which side is thinking about it more clearly, if anyone — and so I’ll punt and just say “follow the links”: a non-definitive summary would note that Sullivan has clashed with Glenn Reynolds and with James Taranto and become an inside joke among numerous other bloggers. Cole is currently in the middle of a blog fight with Dan Riehl, just concluded one with Red State, and before long will probably go another round with Michelle Malkin. […]

  179. 179

    […] Riehl World View, October 18, 2006: Balloon Juice Explodes Really, though. I don’t know how you can read that and not see the overt homophobia and the sickness that is Riehl’s mindset. I am sure Dobson and Rove love it. […]

  180. 180
    Karl Rove II says:

    “John Cole has always been a Trotskyite RINO anyway. If he’s gay, it wouldn’t surprise anyone. We should send him somewhere along with the rest of those perverts. I’m sick of them contaminating America.”

    Damm straight! (err)

    You know them homos is doing things to TEH SOIL!

  181. 181
    Karl Rove II says:

    Nahanni

    Project much dear?

  182. 182

    […] would be the same Dan Riehl who said this when John Cole criticized him for being a pasty, quivering, gelatinous blob of hypocrisy and homophobia: Really? Robert Leroy […]

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] would be the same Dan Riehl who said this when John Cole criticized him for being a pasty, quivering, gelatinous blob of hypocrisy and homophobia: Really? Robert Leroy […]

  2. […] Riehl World View, October 18, 2006: Balloon Juice Explodes Really, though. I don’t know how you can read that and not see the overt homophobia and the sickness that is Riehl’s mindset. I am sure Dobson and Rove love it. […]

  3. […] The fights they pick are not without merit, though it’s sometimes hard to decide which side is thinking about it more clearly, if anyone — and so I’ll punt and just say “follow the links”: a non-definitive summary would note that Sullivan has clashed with Glenn Reynolds and with James Taranto and become an inside joke among numerous other bloggers. Cole is currently in the middle of a blog fight with Dan Riehl, just concluded one with Red State, and before long will probably go another round with Michelle Malkin. […]

  4. […] Wow! There’s quite the brouhaha going on between John Cole at Balloon-Juice and Dan Riehl. John notes (and I think correctly): overt homophobia and the sickness…is Riehl’s mindset. I am sure Dobson and Rove love it. But can we please end the charade- conservative oppostion to Gay marriage and homosexual rights may be, in the minds of a few, about protecting traditional marriage. But in the minds of many, it is just like Dan Riehl- a knee-jerk reaction to fear. to which Riehl responds: That was an older brother of mine, John. He’s dead and, yes, he was Gay. You want to know how he died? He died alone, probably of aids for all I know and probably in a San Francisco flop house living on the government’s dime. I say probably because it was the last address I ever had for him from letters exchanged, not having seen the boy/man since I was about 15. […]

  5. […] All I know, is you conservatives are all a bunch of mean bastards, the biggest bunch of raving slavering gay bashers around, I can barely type qwerty without overwriting an enormous pile of gay bashing hate fill screed. Hell, I even have a “I HATE gays” hot button set up on my keyboard. Yeah, we conservatives are just gay hatin’ bastards, and because of that very fact the extremely principled independent conservative who hates conservatives, John Cole, is going to love voting Democratic this year in retaliation for your nastiness you gay haters. […]

Comments are closed.