Should Barney Frank "out" all gay Republican congresspeople?

[Cyrano]

I don't remember whether the issue was gay marriage or some other gay-oriented, politically-driven piece of crap. But at the time, Representative Barney Frank, an openly gay Democratic congressman from Mass., threatened to "out" gay Republicans. The silence that suddenly came from the Republican side of the aisle was deafening.

So my question is this. Should Barney Frank "out" every gay Republican in congress?

I'm of two minds about this. Everyone is entitled to their privacy, and their sexual orientation is no one's business but their own. As Democrats, these are some of our fundamental beliefs.

Conversely, the Republican Party doesn't think anyone has a right to privacy, and gay bashing has been one of the main weapons they constantly pull out of their bag of slime-filled venom and hatred.

None of us has any idea what Barney Frank is or is not willing to do. But if he was willing to "destroy" as many Republican hypocrite's reputations as possible, do you think he should do it?

[TallahasseeGrannie]

1. No. You don't get in the slime

with the pigs.

[rfranklin]

12. No, you have a surrogate do it...Swift Boat Gays for Truth!

Fox News should go for that.

[TechBear_Seattle]

15. "Leak" the information to Washington Blade

The Blade (gay weekly in DC) has a history of outing quislings on Capitol Hill. In fact, I think it was the Blade that coined the term, for exactly this reason.

But then, I'm certain that the publishers of the Blade already have all the dirt and more.

[Warpy]

23. That'll work. I'm generally opposed to outing

because of the kind of country we all still live in. However, when it's some sanctimonious GOP prick who fights against civil rights for gays, women, and anyone else who isn't a rich, closeted GOP white male, then he's fair game.

I just wish it would extend to the White House. The halls would be nearly empty if it did.

[terrya]

2. If they pursue an anti-gay agenda, you bet he should

Every single gay Republican congressman or Senator who supports the Federal Marriage Amendment, for instance...out them. Every single one. No exceptions.

[meegbear]

5. Ex-actly ...

QED

[Nederland]

9. Question

Would you also publish the names of all pro-life women that had abortions?

[terrya]

14. If they have an agenda to repeal Roe v Wade...

and they said that they want to make abortions illegal under ANY circumstance, everywhere...and if I had that knowledge...you bet I would.

And, btw...when someone is gay, and they actively pursue an agenda that would make gay people second-class citizens and would deny them the same rights that heterosexual people enjoy, then they lose their privacy. Period.

[Nederland]

34. Fair Enough

However, I strongly disagree. Unlike you, I believe that a women has a right to privacy regardless of her political beliefs.

[LostinVA]

20. What Post #14 says -- definitely

[pitohui]

30. absolutely hypocrisy should be pursued

if a powerful woman is trying to take away the rights of women who are less powerful and she has had an abortion and proof is obtained...

absolutely she should be outed

gloves off

the poor woman with no car w. no access to terminations because the nearest clinic is hundreds of miles away -- that woman, forced into pregnancy, is of more concern to me than the woman whose only inconvenience will be to be a tad embarrassed when she is caught out as a hypocrite

i am tired of this world where the GOP rich fuckwits do what they like and it's OK because they're
special -- you know what, the only thing "special" abt them is that they're rich

they have no heart and no soul, their abortion is necessary, their gay love is deep and beautiful, but since we are not rich, our abortions and our loves are criminal?

i'm done w. that

and i'm done w. the argument that you never fight back on their level, at some point, you have to ask yourself -- do you REALLY believe that nothing is worth fighting for EVER?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

32. Agreed 100%....

If they suck dick in private and vote anti-gay legislation in public, they need their asses OUTTED.

It's not about them being gay -- it's about them being FUCKING HYPOCRITES.

[BlooInBloo]

3. Nah - he's gotta deal with collegial atmospheres and whatnot....

... WE, on the other hand, are under no such strictures....

[LoZoccolo]

4. No, for strategic reasons.

If he does that all at once he's out of ammo. He should maybe do one at a time when it's useful for getting something done. Picking out one at random is just as effective, plus you still got more shots if you want them. Or even just threatening to.

[Mist]

26. Frank himself said something like this back in the '90s. He said the

threat of being outed was useful for voting purposes in the House. HOWEVER, with all the Rethug lock-step voting since * took office, Barney may want to rethink that idea. Personally, I'd out 'em just for shits and giggles.

[Sammy Pepys]

6. It would be fun for dramatic purposes.....

...but so what?

I hate all these outing threats the left gets into sometimes. They're playing right into the hands of Christian conservatives who want to make homosexuality something someone should be embarrassed or ashamed of or want to conceal.

[cally]

7. No, Barney Frank should not do this

I hope for a better political climate where the two parties work together. I hope for a political environment where differences don't carry over into the nastiness we've seen. I don't think a congressmember should go against their own values for political gain. It is wrong to out someone. But I'm somewhat of a hypocrite because I have mixed feelings when a liberal activist site like Americablog outs a polician. Maybe it's my belief that elected officials should be held to a higher standard.

[natrat]

8. only the hypocrites

[TX-RAT]

10. Why would anybody want to out another?

[Deja Q]

29. The same way managers share your e-mails without your permission.

[Left Is Write]

11. No, he should not. Period.

[TayTay]

13. What proof would he have?

Does he have some sort of superpowers that allow him to see all gay Repubs? I don't think they socialize. If they are Rethugs, then they don't hang out together.

How would Cong. Frank know this info and have proof enough that he could prove it?

[Cyrano]

21. As I said in the original post, the threat he made when a gay issue was

up before congress produced a deafening silence from the Republicans. I have no idea how he knows who's gay, but their response to his threat seems to indicate he knows what he's talking about.

That aside, when you get into an issue this emotional, do you think people like freepers and fundies need proof? The accusation alone becomes its own "reality."

[Nimrod2005]

16. There are NO gay Republicans? :)

[Canuckistanian]

17. No. Frank shouldn't do it

It should be done by someone who wants to blackmail a GOP member.

Or by a gay lover who's sick of the hypocrisy.

Or by another GOP member in the heat of a primary battle.

But Democrats having nothing to gain by getting down into that mud.

[T Wolf]

22. ...nothing to gain but a victory

Those opposing outing are continuing to carry boxing gloves to a knife fight.

[Stinky The Clown]

18. No easy answer

and I won't profer my usual snark, either.

A part of me says 'yes, do it.'

Another part of me says no, for the obvious reasons.

But the deal breaker is that it would start a thermonuclear 'outing' across the land.

And that's simply not fair.

[hippiechick]

19. No.

If sexuality is to become a non-issue, then we need to leave it out of the public arena and not 'point fingers' across the aisle, regardless of whether they continue to or not.

[pitohui]

24. if he's willing yes he should

i weary of people who think the pleasures of life should be illegal for the many because it makes them more special and erotic for the wealthy few

no wealthy or politically influential person of power should be allowed to hide in the closet while profiting politically and financially from the persecution of middle class, working class, and poor gays

no doubt frank has personal and collegial ties w. the people he works w. even if he doesn't agree w. them politically

this makes it hards to "out" someone because you see them too as a suffering human

however the needs of the few to remain closeted do not outweigh the needs of the many who are already uncloseted and who need the protection of rule of law, marriage is not just about a ring, it's abt access to health insurance, transfer of estate, child custody, and all sorts of financial benefits needed to keep a family whole

[hughee99]

25. Normally, I would think most would agree

this would be a personal matter, especially with all these personal privacy issues going on, but as long as this MAY help out in the short term then I don't see a problem :sarcasm:

The argument FOR this is that we should adopt the tactics of our enemy, even though we personally feel that this is wrong. Doesn't this create a "slippery-slope" argument for doing this in other situations? Could this kind of policy eventually erode our core beliefs to the point where we say were against something, but it's okay as long as it benefits us?

[EminenceFront]

27. Absolutely Not!

Some choose not to come out for their own personal reasons and that should be respected. That's all you or anyone else needs to know.

[Deja Q]

28. Yes - everyone is slimy. Let it show.

[peacetalksforall]

31. There are dozens of hypocricies that should be exposed. This one

shouldn't be touched by Franks or other Dems. Let it happen naturally.

Dems should concentrate on obvious hypocricies. Our Congresspeople are way too diplomatic on some stuff that is not ultra-personal, that should be shouted, but they should not address the peronal stuff.

Dems do not have a vast war machine that is super orchestrated as we know the Republican Party has. Dems have a reputation for tolerance. Dems go their own way. They should get together for everything that has to do with us saving our country. No to the personal stuff. Leave it private. Let them out themselves.

[pitohui]

35. but it doesn't happen naturally because "they" own the press

i suppose all knoxville knows of the special relationship between * and his lifelong pal victor ashe

finally ashe is retired to poland and the white house is then supplied w. an open male prostitute who is given a press pass so that he can pose as a reporter and go freely back and forth

what is the reaction of the media?

ho hum, is the reaction

IOKIYAR

well you know what?

it is not OK if you're a republican if part of the reason you reached highest office in the land was trampling on the rights of other men like you

waiting around for the public to find out "naturally" in absence of a free press is a waste of time

you'll wait decades

meanwhile the man who can't get health care because his spouse is a man and thus not recognized by his employer is long, long dead

waiting for things to happen "naturally" will sentence some to death, it will merely sentence most to unhappiness

working for change is a nuisance but sometimes it must be done if one has the power to do it

my two cents anyway

if i had the power and the evidence i wouldn't hesitate a second to out them all and starting at the very top, not w. some obscure freshman congressdweeb from nowheresville either

[peacetalksforall]

37. You read me wrong - I am absolutely for rights. I say full speed ahead

on rights for partners. Outing - no. Why is it our right to out someone on the most personal level? It's just a version of outing Clinton (the most famous outing instance in the history of our country lasting for years and occupying Congress for years.) No more. I say let them out themselves or let the Republicans out them. That's their thing. We need to stay in the head; stay with facts. Not ultra-persoanl.

[catabryna]

33. As much as I'd like to see...

hypocrisy exposed... my answer would be a flat-out no. The choice of whether to "come out" or not should be left to the individual.

[Virginia Dare]

36. What's to stop the Repubs from outing the Dems in the closet?..

after the Clinton fiasco I supported a scorched earth policy, out all of the sanctimonious asswipes with lovers on the side, hetero and homo, and I'm positive there are plenty of them out ther, but it never happened.

I suspect there would have been enough damage to go all around so a truce was called.