AdamSmith Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Before his apparent acceptance, then rejection, of a woman's right to choose abortion, RNC chair Michael Steele also seemed to go two directions at once on gay rights. Andrew Sullivan sums up in his 'Daily Dish' column: Steele And Gay Couples: WTF? "I think that there's a whole lot that goes into the makeup of an individual that, uh, you just can't simply say, oh, like, 'Tomorrow morning I'm gonna stop being gay.' It's like saying, 'Tomorrow morning I'm gonna stop being black.'" - Michael Steele. Josh Marshall follows up. The interview was given on February 24. In that interview, Steele also says about gay couples' rights: "Well, my position is, hey, look, I have been, um, supportive of a lot of my friends who are gay in some of the core things that they believe are important to them. You know, the ability to be able to share in the information of your partner, to have the ability to—particularly in times of crisis—to manage their affairs and to help them through that as others—you know, as family members or others—would be able to do. I just draw the line at the gay marriage." And yet the very same day he gave another interview to rightwing talk radio host, Mike Gallagher: GALLAGHER: Is this a time when Republicans ought to consider some sort of alternative to redefining marriage and maybe in the road, down the road to civil unions. Do you favor civil unions? STEELE: No, no no. What would we do that for? What are you, crazy? No. Why would we backslide on a core, founding value of this country? I mean this isn't something that you just kind of like, "Oh well, today I feel, you know, loosey-goosey on marriage." [...] GALLAGHER: So no room even for a conversation about civil unions in your mind? STEELE: What's the difference? He makes Palin look smart. http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_...-for-th-15.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BigK Posted March 13, 2009 Members Share Posted March 13, 2009 What a dim wit. What's the downside to supporting civil unions?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caeron Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 It's politics. Talking out of both sides of your mouth is a job requirement. consistency of your position isn't. It's hardly unique to Steele or the republicans, though I'll grant that this is a pretty amusing bit of inconsistency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 2hard2tame Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Deleted. Way off topic. TY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 2hard2tame Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 What a dim wit. What's the downside to supporting civil unions?? Personally, I point out the fact that gay relationships as a whole last longer than most heterosexual marriages. You value more that which you have to fight for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest StuCotts Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 I see Steele as an individual of basically humane instincts which have to struggle against the shrilly inhumane collective instincts of his party's "base". In unguarded moments his better angels make it to the surface, only to be suppressed when his guard is up. I don't think he needs to fear for his job because: 1. It would be a disgrace for the party to axe him after so short a tenure; 2. Nobody else wants the job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
