two newspapers knew that California State Senator Ashburn was gay and said nothing

[dsc]

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2010/03/collusion-people-knew-roy-ashburn-was.html

Last summer an editor at Ashburn's hometown paper, the Bakersfield Californian, heard that a Sacramento paper was about to out him. So they called him and asked him point-blank if he is gay.
His response: "Why would that be anyone's business? Including The Californian's? "I think there are certain subjects that are simply not relevant and this is one of them. It has no bearing on the job I do." During the course of our conversation I listed several instances in which a politician's sexual orientation, or even just their sexual activity -- straight or gay -- would be relevant. If Ashburn were a staunch anti-gay activist but was secretly gay, I said, that would be a legitimate concern to his constituents. Ashburn agreed but said he didn't believe he had been such an activist. I pointed out he had voted conservatively on gay issues throughout his career. Yes, he said, but he'd done so on almost all social issues. He represents a conservative district and votes as his constituents would want him to, he said. Several political organizations have ranked Ashburn's voting record as extremely unfriendly to gays. (I'm not sure where those organizations rank Senate Majority Leader Dean Florez, a Democrat, who initially voted against all gay issues for much the same reason, but since has turned a new leaf.) And Ashburn did organize a "Traditional Family Values" rally in 2005 to drum up support for a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

The Californian decided that Ashburn's sexuality wasn't "relevant." The unnamed Sacramento paper apparently did too and never published. To recap: It's not relevant that a state politician with a 100% rating from an anti-gay group is gay himself. Can you fucking BELIEVE that? And it turns out that the openly gay mayor of West Sacramento has known about Ashburn for a long time.

end of quote more at link

Would the same paper consider it irrelevent if a politician was against union busting but was found to hire scabs? Or what if the paper found out a politician who was against individuals owning guns shot a burgler in his home with a gun he secretly kept?

[bobburgster]

1. Can you fucking BELIEVE that? YUP!

Or what if the paper found out a politician who was against individuals owning guns shot a burglar in his home with a gun he secretly kept?

HA! Wouldn't happen in this case....as much as the far right love to say the media is ultra-liberal, it is just a red herring.

[Myrina]

2. "Was" ... or "is" ?

:shrug:

[Bitwit1234]

3. I find absolutely no fault with a person being gay BUT

the fault lies with the fact that these people in some cases are so loud mouthed against gay people and they are gay themselves. If people in this country would let a person live their life the way they want to, as long as they bring no harm to others, we would get along a lot better. And we all know it.

[madokie]

5. A persons sexual orientation is not a choice

Once people figure that out then there maybe can be some peace.

[Garbo 2004]

4. The Sacramento publication likely was not a mainstream newspaper

like the Sacramento Bee. The Bakersfield newspaper that mentions the rumor last year of an Ashburn outing by an unnamed Sacto publication refers to it as "a Sacramento publication with a gay audience."

[Ecumenist]

8. I wonder if they're referring to the Sacramento News & Review?

I know alot of gay people read that paper ...I just can't believe that they let this SOB get away with his anti-gay spew but kept his cover! How much longer will we allow this to happen? How many gay teens have committed suicide because of this creep and his sort?

[Garbo 2004]

11. I was thinking more along the lines of "Mom Guess What?" a small local LGBT publication.

There may be others. Could be News & Review since they do investigative reporting, but the description to me suggested a more LGBT related publication. After all, the Sacto Bee also could be described as a "publication with a gay audience" but it wouldn't be singled out as a distinguishing characteristic. But if it wasn't a LGBT pub, then I'd figure N&R.

[Ecumenist]

13. Oh yeah!! I completely forgot about that one.

LOL!! Ashburn it literally going to get his "ass burned" now that he's been outed and proven to be a despicable human being. Creep.

[Zenlitened]

6. Sad, sad, sad. How anyone can consider the facts here "not relevant"...

... is just beyond me.

I suspect it's because the issue is "only" about "gay stuff." Y'know... not important, not even real to most folks, unless it's to make a joke or spew a slur.

:( Ugh. There is no such thing as Journalism anymore.

[Garbo 2004]

7. Queerty cites an unidentified source that says he tipped off Sacto media last yr but

they wouldn't touch the story, saying it was his private life despite his voting record. The source says he contacted media again after Ashburn's DUI and CBS 13 followed up. Ch 13's reports have been emphasizing Ashburn's voting record. http://www.queerty.com/meet-the-man-who-outed-ca-sen-roy-ashburn-to-the-media-that-refused-to-report-the-story-20100305/

[rucky]

9. A paper shouldn't out somebody

unless he gets arrested after leaving a gay nightclub with a guy or something like that.

[GreenTea]

10. If one is a republican in these places-they can get away with anything

As long as they are republican....ALL republicans are really filthy fucking disgusting lying hypocritical creatures.

[Renew Deal]

12. If the papers had "outed" him people would be outraged that a newspaper would do that.

It's his personal business, and although his voting record is reprehensible, it's still his business. The papers made probably did the right thing.

[dsc]

14. So if Diane Feinstein were found to own an arsenal of semi automatic rifles

would that be just her business too? If not, what is the difference?

[mstinamotorcity]

15. Ashburn being gay is not the issue

The issue is the hypocrisy of his vote and voting record.People in the LGBT community have been fighting for years to gain acceptance in this country for their right to be themselves without the moral body controllers telling them that they are to fake it.this is another one of those things that it wasn't anyone's business about his sexual preference,but when you try to persecute others for being what you already are (gay) and using a political agenda to do it now its everybody's business.And I am tired of using the nice word hypocrisy to describe the untrue representation of repug verbalizations,actions,and voting consistencies. Lie,lying,liars thats the word(s), that should be used.