Media Whitewashes Liberal Gay Rights "Nut Job" Floyd Lee Corkins

28-year-old Democratic gay rights advocate Floyd Lee Corkins II, from Virginia, shows up at the Christian Conservative Family Research Council in DC, Chik-fil-A bags in tow, walks in with a loaded weapon and starts shooting. Before he opens fire, he mentions something about not liking FRCs policies [on gay marriage].  He wounds a guard who manages, with the help of others, to overpower Corkins, and prevent a potential massacre.

How long did that story stay in the mainstream media?  Not long at all. Of course, had it been a right wing-nut job attacking some liberal organization, we'd still be hearing about it. But since it was a liberal-nut job, it's no big deal.

Corkins had apparently volunteered at the DC Center for the LGBT Community.  The executive director, David Mariner,  condemned the attack- as did 40 other LGBT organizations- saying:

"I was shocked to hear that someone who has volunteered with the DC Center could be the cause of such a tragic act of violence. No matter the circumstances, we condemn such violence in the strongest terms possible. We hope for a full and speedy recovery for the victim and our thoughts are with him and his family."

Are the media and police officials taking the attack seriously? It doesn't seem like it. The Hollywood Reporter mentions this:

Despite the Chick-fil-A connection, his activities as a gay-rights activist and the shooter's reference to what FRC "stands for," law enforcement officials were careful not to imply a motive while speaking to the press.

"We don't know enough about him or his circumstances ... we are going to try to sort this all out, pull the evidence and do all the interviews we can," FBI agent James McJunkin told ABC News.

The motive seems pretty darn obvious. Some news reports did say the FBI were treating it as a case of domestic terrorism, whether that sticks is another story.

Corkin's 9mm handgun was legal, and purchased "fairly recently", which would indicate that it was purchased specifically for this attack.

I doubt we'll hear too much more about this whole incident.

Cartoon Source:  Media Research Center

Chicago- No To Chik-fil-A, Yes To Anti-Gay Nation of Islam Restaurant Salaam

By now everyone knows about the Chik-fil-A controversy, and the call for a boycott of the Christian-owned fast food chicken eatery by the gay and lesbian community (and supporters) after president Dan Cathy admitted he is anti-gay marriage. He didn't specifically say he was anti-gay, he simply stated that he believes in the "biblical definition of the family unit."  Heck, there are gays I know who are against gay marriage. Not many, mind you, but there are some. Does that make them anti-gay? I really don't care one way or another, there are far more pressing global issues to be concerned about, like a nuclear Iran, or the massacre in Syria.  Should gays and lesbians and their partners have rights, absolutely. Should they be discriminated against? No way. But gay marriage is not something  I spend much time thinking about. 

So now everyone wants to shut down a company that employs thousands, in an economy that is tanking. How smart is that. If you don't agree with the philosophy of a particular company, don't patronize that business, but don't force everyone else to do the same. Cathy is  not going to change his stance on gay marriage, so what's the point?  He didn't call for the killing of gays, unlike the Westboro Baptist wackos; or that extremely un-Christian pastor in N.C. who thought it would be a great idea to round up gays and lesbians, corral them behind an electric fence, and let them die; or pretty much the bulk of one particular religion, at least in the Middle East and parts of Asia.

Ironically, Chicago just opened its arms to a restaurant built by anti-gay, anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan's the Nation of Islam, and yet Rahm Emanuel has said he backs the blocking of the construction of another Chik-fil-A in Chi-town. What most of the people calling for a boycott don't realize is that Chik-fil-As are franchised, and maybe some owners might not have as strong an opinion against gay marriage as Cathy, and they will suffer as well, along with all the people they employ who might so happen to be pro-gay marriage.
So, back to Salaam, the Nation of Islam's 5 million dollar eatery.  It sounds like a great place to eat, healthy dining, great vegetarian options. Just up my alley  Would I eat there? Never. Why? Because of Farrakhan's hate-filled ideology. Would I tell people to boycott? No. Should gays boycott Nation of Islam restaurants because of their anti-gay rhetoric? If they are boycotting Chik-fil-A, they sure as heck should. The Nation of Islam is a far greater threat than a man who doesn't support gay marriage.  Farrakhan also happens to be anti-gay marriage.

Legal Insurrection blog also points out the hypocrisy of Boston Mayor Thomas Menino's declaration that he would block a planned Boston Chik-fil-A- although he was taken to task for that by a Boston Globe editorial:

But which part of the First Amendment does Menino not understand? A business owner’s political or religious beliefs should not be a test for the worthiness of his or her application for a business license.

Chick-fil-A must follow all state and city laws. If the restaurant chain denied service to gay patrons or refused to hire gay employees, Menino’s outrage would be fitting. And the company should be held to its statement that it strives to “treat every person with honor, dignity and respect — regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation, or gender.” But beyond the fact that Chick-fil-A is closed on Sundays, the religious beliefs of the company’s top executive don’t appear to control its operations.

LI also references a blog post by Michael Graham that claims Mayor Menino supported a homophobic mosque in Boston.

This is the Islamic Society of Boston’s mosque in Boston’s Roxbury neighborhood, a.k.a. “Menino’s Mosque.

Mayor Menino “sold” $2 million worth of city property to the ISB for $175,000, despite their well-documented links to Muslim extremism. The mosque teaches a form of Islam that condemns homosexuals to death.

And Menino won’t let a guy spend his own money opening a restaurant because he doesn’t support same-sex marriage? Hey, Mayor Moron—when was the last time Chick-Fil-A stoned a gay guy to death?

How's that for liberal hypocrisy.

Obama's Pandering: Endorses Gay Marriage

Who knows what Barack Obama, political opportunist extraordinaire,  truly feels about gay marriage, since he's changed his stance from a "yea' to a "nay' back to a 'yea' again.

The Independent Journal Review posted the above cartoon along with the following Obama quotes, referencing the gay marriage issue:

I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages. (1996)
What I believe is that marriage is between a man and a woman. (2004)
I believe marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian, it’s also a sacred union. (2008)
My feelings about this are constantly evolving. I struggle with this. (2010)
I think same sex couples should be able to get married. (2012)

Ironically, Republican Dick Cheney came out in favor of gay marriage in 2009, 4 years prior to Obama's so-called change of heart.

One has to question why, at this juncture, did he decide to speak out? Yes, Joe Biden beat him to the punch, so he couldn't very well not pipe in on the issue, but more importantly he's not quite as popular as he was during the 2008 campaign, and he's losing some of his core base. It must have been hard for him back then and now to decide which demographic to best  pander to: the Black and  Hispanic vote that has a tendency to be conservative on issues like abortion and gay marriage, or the liberal Hollywood elite (who have buckets of money) and gays who obviously have a vested interest in gay marriage.  Obama is more concerned with image, getting votes and raking in campaign funds than sticking to principles, if he even has any.  But endorsing gay marriage has given his sagging campaign a lift, of sorts.  My FaceBook feed is chock full of praise for Obama, even from a few who were a tad disillusioned with him, and the calls for donations have been rolling in.

But it will be interesting to see whether this decision in the long run was a good one or not.  Even though there was a small spike in popularity, there are some who voted for Obama in 2008 who might not vote for him this time around, as a result of his gay marriage endorsement.

A Black Philadelphia pastor, Bishop Leonard C. Goins, said,

"He's wrong, he's in error, it's a mistake and it will hurt him."

And many see this ploy as what they term a "gimmick", and that includes some gay Democrats.

Delsa Bernardo, who co-owns Yiya's Gourmet Cuban Bakery and Cafe in Miami with her girlfriend, backed Obama in 2008 but has since become disillusioned over economic issues. She said she's happy he's spoken out in support of gay marriage but wants to see what actions he takes to back up his words.

Bernardo said she is frustrated with the Obama administration over the difficulty in getting loans despite the federal bailouts he supported. She's had to pay out of pocket $1,600 this month for an industrial juicer and a glass case to display her popular red velvet cupcakes, as well as $4,000 for roof repairs because she can't get a loan. She hasn't paid herself in two weeks.

"I'm happy and I think it's about time our country does it," she said. "But I don't think it's all `Whoo-hoo!' I mean, who cares who you're sleeping with?"

Most gay conservatives (including the ones that I know) could care less about gay marriage, and see right through Obama's artifice.

Personally, gay marriage is a non-issue for me, there are far more pressing problems in this country and the world to worry about who marries whom. I do believe that long-term, committed partners should have some legal rights, though; it only seems fair.

Squelching Free Speech: Pissy Perez Hilton VS Miss California (Carrie Prejean)

Since when do we, as Americans, not have the right to voice an opinion? As much as gays have the right to state they should be able to marry, those who oppose the idea have as much right to disagree. This whole issue was thrown into the spotlight by one vicious, nasty little guy called Perez Hilton, who had the gall to ask beauty contestant Miss California, Carrie Prejean, what her beliefs were regarding gay marriage. First of all, what kind of baiting question is that? Second of all, she's entitled to her opinion, whether you agree or not, because this is a free country! Just because someone might not agree with gay marriage, and there are plenty of gay people who don't, does NOT mean one is anti-gay. She probably lost the title because of her answer.

Perez also took it upon himself to try and destroy a Florida photographer who emailed chastising him for the Miss California fiasco, by posting the email on his blog- address, phone number etc. Granted, the photographer's choice of words was very distasteful, but Perez had no right to publish that information.

His website got overloaded and crashed. And his email inbox filled up with hate mail. Someone wanted to burn his home. Someone else wrote about killing him and his family.

So, while people get bent out of shape because there are those who believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, where is the outcry regarding stories regarding the torture and murder of gays in the Middle East? There was a recent story about gay men in Iraq having their anuses glued shut, then being force-fed a liquid that causes diarrhea, which leads to eventual death. Shouldn't they be blogging about that?

Perez Hilton, and the like, are truly pathetic for their spitefulness and lack of priorities!