Friday, September 29, 2006

Page 1 Consider (09/29)


  • McGreevey's Big Gay Night Out: I was a little taken aback at the hostile response to my post about Jim McGreevey's appearance on Oprah last week. I never implied in any way that he was an exemplary governor (although I know enough to know that if every politician were thrown out of office for hiring people for the wrong reason then there would be no politicians), nor did I say he was any sort of role model. Nonetheless, all of the attacks seemed to be predicated on the assumption that I thought he was both of these things. The only thing I took away from his appearance was a better understanding of how he could have done the rotten things he did. And being a gay man, I was trying to get across to you how much I could relate to a lot of the issues he addressed. Period. Why as gay men are we so hypercritical of our own, and so quick to condemn him just because some of us were wise enough to not make some of the same (poor) choices he did. Apparently I'm not alone in my feelings. About 80 like-minded people showed up for his book signing in DC and I can't help but think it was therapeutic for all involved. (WP)

  • State of Denial: More disturbing news about the war in Iraq. A new book by Bob Woodward claims that the White House ignored an urgent warning in September 2003 from a top Iraq adviser who said that thousands of additional American troops were desperately needed to quell the insurgency there. The book says President Bush's top advisers were often at odds among themselves, and sometimes were barely on speaking terms, but shared a tendency to dismiss as too pessimistic assessments from American commanders and others about the situation in Iraq. Donald Rumsfeld became so hostile toward Condoleezza Rice that the president had to intervene to tell him he must return her phone calls. (NYT)

  • Dreaming of Zack and Slater: I'll bet when you fantasized that a sex tape would surface starring one of the boys from "Saved by the Bell" you weren't hoping for this. (TMZ)

  • D'uh: The author at the center of an elaborate literary hoax is finally coming clean about something that has been common knowledge for quite some time: Laura Albert is acknowledging that she is JT LeRoy, the supposed male author of gritty, graphic, best-selling novels like "Sarah" and "The Heart is Deceitful Above All Things." Although her interview with the Paris Review is supposed to be a mea culpa, her take on whether or not she feels shame about misleading people is, uh, deceitful above all things: "If knowing that I'm 15 years older than (LeRoy) devalues the work, then I'm sorry they feel that way." For those keeping score, LeRoy is a purported 25-year-old former male prostitute and drug addict born in 1980 who drew from his own experiences hustling, living on the streets and selling sex for his literary work. Albert is separated, 40-year-old mother of one son. (AP) // Related: Deceitful Above All Things and JT LeRoy Sighting



  • Ugly Betties: A hundred actresses dressed up as ABC's version of ugly descended upon New York's key tourist spots Thursday to promote "Ugly Betty," the American take on a hit Colombian TV series that has become popular throughout the world. I saw a number of ugly people yesterday on my way to work in Times Square, yet oddly none of these gals. (AP)

  • 98 Degrees and Falling: Before my crush on Nick Lachey fully kicked in it was fellow 98 Degree bandmate Jeff Timmons who had my heart. Lucky for him a judge in Florida gave him a year's probation for a DUI incident earlier this year. (People)

  • Salt in the Wound: While the White House has long insisted they barely knew of or had any contact with the disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, a bipartisan congressional report documents a very different picture. The House Government Reform Committee report, based on e-mail messages and other records subpoenaed from Abramoff's lobbying firm, found 485 contacts between Abramoff's lobbying team and White House officials from 2001 to 2004, including 82 with Karl Rove's office. Being the "partisan Democrat" that I am you might think this would make me happy. Yet at this point in the game I find it (oddly) makes my stomach turn. (WP)

  • 2 comments:

    Anonymous said...

    K,

    I think you missed the point of the criticism of McCreepy. People were not being hypercritical. We were being critical of a man who is undeserving of praise. Just because he is gay doesn't mean he should get a free pass for being a corrupt politician or a user. If anything, it's a breath of fresh air that we are able to look at a person and judge him purely on his actions and ethics.

    James McGreevey married his wife for purely cynical reasons: he knew he was gay but wanted higher office. He then cheated on his wife on the same day she gave birth to his child. There's no excuse for that. Nor is there an excuse for putting his lover on the public payroll.

    McGreevey is a human being and does deserve empathy, respect, and forgiveness. However, he does not deserve any praise or any kind of celebrity status for being "an out Gay American." He's just another cynical politician, no different than any other scumbag who twists words and truth to achieve his goals. He's just like Karl Rove, willing to tell whatever lie to get what he wants.

    Today, McGreevey is trying to make profit off the misery he caused his wife, the plundering of the state coffers, and his sexuality. Why can't he just be like any other crook and slink away.

    There are real GLBT people who deserve recognition for their good works. Some do find themselves in heterosexual relationships. James McGreevey is not one of them. He's a crook.

    The Boy Wonder said...

    Once again you're NOT READING what was written. It specifically says there is NO PRAISE for McGreevey. It says k. related to what was being offered as an explanation for some really BAD behavior. Get off your high horse (that you won't even admit to being on) and learn to read.

    Share This

    Blog Widget by LinkWithin