Tom Swift's Sour Grapes
I posted about an anti-gay flyer used by Tom Swift to go after openly gay school board candidate, Al Oertwig yesterday on [theStPaulList]:
Swift's flyer against Al Oertwig (mentioning Oertwig's homosexuality, and trying to prey on
fears about the "homosexual agenda") was used by the Oertwig campaign this year to raise money and support from the Gay community. Ofcourse Oertwig didn't identify Swift as the author, but rather "one of the Republican candidates". This ofcourse is used to try to tar the whole republican party as anti-gay.
In response to a post I made yesterday to the [theStPaulList], on the Oertwig flyer, Swift replies:
Huh, you don't say. Can you tell us more about this Eva? Where did you get this information from..I'm dying to know!
If Al is bringing up the flyer as a campaign issue, it's not really fair to the other candidates (or myself since I wrote it) that he keep the discussion one sided is it?
The fact of the matter is, if this is true it is exactly what spurred me to create the flyer in the first place.
If Al is going to make his sexual preferance an issue as regards his position with the school board, then it deserves to be a public issue, not one carried out "in secret" among a select audience don't you think?
Please inform us!
EY: According to someone attending the Thursday Debate, Swift brought this up, and Oertwig handled the question quite well according to my source. Now I remember the description of the flyer. It was Oertwig's Lavender ad - then Swift commenting about the homosexual agenda.
I suppose according to Tom Swift a gay candidate should not advertise or reach out to the gay community.
On another topic, Mr Swift - is still avoiding answering the question about whether it was he or his evil twin I spotted at the Kevin Jennings (GLSEN President) event at Blake School? Inquiring minds still want to know.
Friday, October 31, 2003
Tom Swift's Sour Grapes
Posted by lloydletta at 11:08 PM
Thursday, October 30, 2003
Is Tom Swift St Paul's Renee Lavoi?
Who is Renee LaVoi? Read the background here.
St Paul is having a school board debate tonight. I am not sure where that will be.
I posted the following today on the St Paul Unofficial Issues list.
Swift's flyer against Al Oertwig (mentioning Oertwig's homosexuality, and trying to prey on fears about the "homosexual agenda") was used by the Oertwig campaign this year to raise money and support from the Gay community. Ofcourse Oertwig didn't identify Swift as the author, but rather "one of the Republican candidates". This ofcourse is used to try to tar the whole republican party as anti-gay. I've talked to other Republican candidates, and Tom Conlon and Warren Anderson do not strike me as anti-gay. Georgia Dietz is very misinformed about Gays and Lesbians (to put it mildly), and Tom Swift has regularly tried to defame gays in his posts on the St Paul Issues list. I've never wanted Swift shut down from that list for that - and I posted in response to that, what I considered more accurate information, so that Swift's misrepresentations of the Out for Equity Program wouldn't stand.
EY: In response, this showed up in my inbox:
You made a fairly serious public allegation regarding Saint Paul School Board Chairman Al Oertwig's use of a flyer I created during his 1999 campaign, to defame the Republican candidates for school board and the Republican party itself.
I think that a bit of substiantiation is in order; can you supply the source of your information, or did you witness the event that you describe personally?
There is a public forum this evening in which all School board candidates will be present. This issue will no doubt be brought up, and as director of the Minnesota Log Cabin Republicans you must realize that political statements you make publicly are subject to scruitiny by the DFL and it's candidates, so it might be be in your best interest to get the facts as you
know them out in the open.
Please respond at your very earliest convienance.
Republican Party of Minnesota
Log Cabin Republicans
Saint Paul Republican City Committee
I mentioned I got it from the GLBT Press. I told Swift to look through the issues and find it for himself.
There's nothing inaccurate about Oertwig's claim from what I recall. The claim just was not complete. I also have no problem with anti-gay piece's of lit from party endorsed candidates being used against other party endorsed candidates. Anti-gay campaign tactics from some republican candidates hurt the party. Anti-gay campaign tactics by Democratic candidates (and they do get used sometimes) don't end up hurting the Democratic Party the way they should.
I also have no problem with Stonewall DFL and the Wellstone Campaign trying to use Norm Coleman's 1998 anti-gay flyer that he used at the 1998 Republican convention against him with the gay community. Norm Coleman never did publically distance himself from that flyer.
I've seen nothing comparable to Coleman's flyer come from any of the statewide Republican Candidates running in 2000 - and I was at the Republican Convention. There were some anti-gay flyers, but they did not come from campaigns.
There was also anti-gay rhetoric coming from the floor.
Do Republicans want to stop having anti-gay flyers put out by Republicans to quit being used as fundraisers for Democrats? Then they need to stop producing this ammunition for the Democratic Party.
Just my two cents.
Posted by lloydletta at 6:17 PM
Mitch Berg Adds Value to Lloydletta
Yup, Mitch must have tried to make a comment on the site, and it seems the commenting script doesn't work any more. I had tried to get holoscan to work previously, but they were not taking new users at the time. It seems that now they are.
The commenting system now uses Holoscan, and it works. I just tested it. Enjoy.
Posted by lloydletta at 1:12 PM
Wednesday, October 29, 2003
B Allan Ross: Eva Young has no connection to USQueers Website
This was originally posted to the us_queers egroup, but is not available there, since the egroup was deleted by Yahoo. I reposted this message for informational purposes to the Log Cabin Republicans of Minnesota elist, and this message is available about half way down the page (after James Nimmo's comments).
Allan Ross on the Culture and Family Instititute Hitpiece.
Thanks for keeping us updated on their latest nonsense, assyrianh. I was waiting for this shoe to drop. I'm fine, still breaking no probation conditions, contrary to A. Smith's typically shoddy reporting. So, you and me "in bed together," Eva? They should have read our earlier "love notes" on queerpolitics.
You're the only modern Republican I've found worth talking to, gay or not, and that's only become easier over a long time, through your consistent, straight-forward, uphill insistence on recognition and respect as a member of LCR, even if all it achieved was for me to simply choose to remain silent sometimes. I don't scream anymore when I see your name and I read ("listen") to what you have to say. You're completely, entirely, always and forever, immutably _wrong_, but I listen.
I'm still debating with myself over the need and possible format for a statement of some kind, there are so many lies in those strange, gossipy stories.
I don't believe that LCR will achieve its "educational" goals. The fact that each of the sleazy organizations and third-rate publications currently buzzing around like mosquitoes are Republican doesn't help one tiny bit. I still believe it is a very foolish and self-destructive move for any Queer to vote for any Republican as long as the Taliban-ish RC (Religious Correctness) enforcers are pulling the strings in this Republican regime. Many warned what would happen if GWB was elected. It has all come true so far, and they're just getting started.
I have always specifically had permission from the judge to post to any email lists I choose. It's in the court records in several places. Funny the "reporter" missed that. I'm glad the judge, not the D.A., does the sentencing. There are many things for me to address regarding the current episode of UsQueers.com vs. them, especially now that they've created public fiction about Eva. They are so obvious and heavy-handed, coordinated yet so juvenile. They're desperate to find ways to put more pressure on the Republican leaders to be more anti-Queer in public, to speak out in favor of the latest supremacist blatherings of the latest Republican big shot who spoke the truth and hurt his party, and, believe it or not (fake surprise!), to attempt to get the Republican Party to kick out the Log Cabin Republicans entirely, simply because they are not heterosexual.
Just for the record, I'll say it clearly and plainly, not for the last time. At no time, ever, has there been any sort of "connection" between Eva Young and UsQueers.com. Most Republicans, Queer or het, couldn't even make it past the name of the website, if they happened upon it. GLBTI Republicans _never_ would refer to themselves as being Queer. There are a lot of other people who this applies to also, but RC Republicans are the topic. The reporter(s) freely joined the us_queers email list owned by Rusty in order to dig up some sort of trashy information about the members of the list (just to create another fresh anti-gay flap for the Republicans?). Anyone else, including Eva Young, is also free to join the list, post to it, browse through old messages, and even, if they have the experience and temperament, may volunteer to help keep the many christohet supremacist list attackers at bay by being a moderator. Now that all you supremacists in Queer's clothing have subscribed to the us_queers Yahoo! email list, would it be accurate to say that you are "connected" with UsQueers.com also? That you support UsQueers.com? Silence equals assent. Thank you for your support.
Posted by lloydletta at 11:40 PM
Response to Worldnet Daily Article Attacking Eva Young and Log Cabin Republicans
Worldnet Daily recently published an article about Log Cabin Republicans alleging that Log Cabin Republicans are "linked" to groups that advocate
This is a slightly edited response I wrote to a Republican Party suburban district chair who sent me this article.
Since much of this article focused on myself, Eva Young, and an egroup I participate in, I wished to espond. I am speaking on behalf of myself as an individual, not on behalf of any organization of which I am a member, board member or board officer or employee or writer.
First of all Worldnet Daily never contacted me for comment. I participate in many web forums/egroups. This doesn't mean I agree with others on the forums. I remember debating with Alan Ross on the queerpolitics list - and thought he was totally looney left. Also on the Queerpolitics list - I condemned the sentiments expressed on this page. So also did the Human Rights Campaign.
I just disagreed that the US Queers site should be forced to be taken down. I've always been strongly in favor of freedom of speech, and have always disliked hate speech codes and that sort of thing. I also have always been a vocal opponent of hate crimes legislation. If you review the contents of my weblog, this should be obvious.
Look at other parts of the Culture and Family Institute piece:
They mention that I work for the University of Minnesota and the University of Minnesota Press published Judith Levine's book. Well I don't work for the University of Minnesota Press - and don't have anything to do with anything politically the U does and don't have editorial control over what the
University of Minnesota Press publishes or doesn't publish. It is a non-sequitor to say the U hired me - and the U Press published Judith Levine's book - the two don't have anything to do with each other.
Also look at the end of the Allyson Smith piece on the C&F website:
Pray for Eva Young, Bruce Allan Ross, Rusty Morris, Patrick Guerrierro, and everyone associated with usQueers.com and Log Cabin Republicans to be delivered from homosexuality. Do what you can to inform Republican Party officials about Log Cabin Republicans' radical "gay" activist affiliations.
The piece then gives the emails and phone numbers of the President of the US, the Republican National Committee and Log Cabin Republicans.
This pretty much sums up the Culture and Family Institute agenda: to try to get Gay people who are perfectly comfortable with their sexuality to change to being straight. I still do not understand why it is the Culture and Family Institute's business to decide who I fall in love with.
Regarding Gary Morella, I wrote him and the Penn State Spokesman to ask if Gary spoke for Penn State or for himself. I also wanted to know whether the things he was saying was related to his research at Penn - or just speaking for himself as an individual. The Penn State spokesman told me in an email that Gary didn't speak for Penn State.
And let's see - guess who was the source of most of this: Kirk Zimpfer of Muncie Indiana - a guy who believes sodomy ought to be punished by the death penalty - and also a guy who posted really crude sexual messages to other gay men on both the us_queers list (the one I was criticized for participating in) and sodomlist. If you want to see some of those messages for yourself, simply go
here: and search on "homosareperverse" which is Kirk Zimpfer's pen name on that list.
Let's look at another example, you [my correspondant] used to be on the Southwest Minnesota Politics list run by Ben Thompson. Ben Thompson's been convicted of molesting two teenage girls. Ben Thompson also had a leadership role in one of Rep. Mark Kennedy's campaigns. Does that mean you or Rep. Mark Kennedy support that criminal act? Ofcourse it doesn't. This is the logic that the C&F people are trying to use against me - and against Log Cabin Republicans.
Speaking for myself
Posted by lloydletta at 11:33 PM
Monday, October 27, 2003
City Pages on the Porter Police Brutality Case
The article asks, is this an Abdul Luima-like, or a Tawanna Brawley like?
Posted by lloydletta at 5:02 PM
Sunday, October 26, 2003
The Mitch Berg Research Techniques
I looked up some of Mitch's sources - and they are rather curious.
One of the sources is a footnote - which just says "id". From the reference to the footnote (do a find on "38".)
It is apparent that denial of the issue of same sex domestic violence is greater in the gay male community than in the lesbian community.
Lundy argues that:
In the gay male community, unlike in the lesbian community, there is little controversy about the issue of domestic violence because there is almost no discussion of it.
EY: Ok, but where does this say that Lesbians are as violent as straight males? Mitch's text says: "A wide variety of sources echo the notion that lesbians are, at the very least, no less violent than straight males." "A wide variety of sources" is linked to this footnote - which oddly enough says nothing (just id).
Now I'm curious whether these same sources are cited on anti-gay sites - such as the Family Research Council or Focus on the Family.
If Mitch was going to to some honest citations, he would cite the source, not the footnote - and link to the medline reference (which is available online).
If this is the way Mitch does research, I wonder how much else I would find in his blog when he cites sources, and I follow the cites, would the citation say what Mitch says it does.
Posted by lloydletta at 9:32 AM