Bill O’Reilly: The Gays Started The War On Christmas

Each week, Queerty picks one blowhard, hypocrite, airhead, sanctimonious prick or other enemy of all that is queer to be the Douche of the Week. 

Have a nominee for DOTW? E-mail it to us at [email protected].

We were almost going to nominate the justices of the Supreme Court for dragging out the marriage-equality issue so long, but we don’t want to jinx anything. Fortunately, Fox News shill Bill O’Reilly gave us a great reason to crown him this week’s top douche: He fingered the LGBT community and reproductive-rights advocates for launching the first salvo in the War on Christmas.

O’Reilly was really following the lead of Imus in the Morning producer Bernard McGuirk, who claimed “the war on Christmas is very, very real,” and is fueled bt “abortion and the gay-rights agenda,” because Fundamentalists oppose both.

Said O’Reilly: “I absolutely agree 100% that the diminishment of Christianity is the target and Christmas is the vehicle because the secularists know the opposition to their agenda—legalized drugs is in that as well—comes primarily from the Judeo-Christian traditionalist people.

What exactly are all these reactionaries talking about when they cite the War on Christmas?  Do they mean the commercialization of the holiday and the de-emphasis of Jesus’ birth?

Well, they’re right: Who even thinks of Jesus at Christmastime anymore? When was the last time a network ran The Greatest Story Ever Told?

It’s all about presents and “the spirit of giving.”

But it wasn’t us homos that did it—it was corporations looking to make end-of-the-year profits.

And it started decades ago, well before there was such a thing as gay rights. Even our modern-day concept of Santa Claus comes from Coca-Cola ads from the 1920s and ’30s.

Ironically, the right-wing Republicans who make up Fox News’ audience just love giant corporations. They’re people, after all!

So for heaping yet another societal ill at our feet, we’re giving O’Reilly a lump of coal in his stocking. All together now: What a douche!

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #politics #gayagenda #random stories and more


  • BJ McFrisky

    So, by your own admission, it wasn’t Bill O’Reilly’s comment, it was McGuirk’s that has so offended. So why, Mr. Avery, is O’Reilly the object of your criticism?

  • 2eo

    Hahaha. O’Reilly and this Brenard McGuirk really are the lunatic fringe. This mystical and mythical war on the festivus time of giving [which as a pro choice gay atheist and a very, very active one at that] just isn’t happening.

    If anything christianity has clawed some ground back [sadly] over the past decade, on the back of “patriotism” and the anti islamic neo-conservative agenda providing a shot in the arm for the moral crusaders, who are just as toxic as the islamists to civilisation.

    If there was an actual war the intellectual and moral grounds belong absolutely to us in every conceivable dynamic and application. They would have lost already. Look at how many defeats “we inflict” on the christianisation of modern society even with them dominating every major influential position in western society. They’re getting battered everywhere education is available because they can NOT compete with us.

  • Dez

    These fools don’t know the first thing about Christianity! Jesus Christ was not against homosexuals, and would not be against gay rights! The misogynistic church men were/are against gay rights! They need to stop claiming Christianity for themselves when it’s for everyone- Gay’s included! Jesus befriended the prostitutes, eunuchs and outcasts for gods sake! And these guys lump gay rights with abortion to make it seem horrible… equating gay civil rights with killing fetus’s, are you kidding me?! Get a f*cking life! And really, a war on Christmas?! And it’s all because of the gays?

  • Cam

    Actually, the Santa themed toy driven Christmas used to be attacked by REAL Christians as a secularization of Christmas that was blasphemous.

    Funny how these supposed Christians on FOX are defending something that real Christians think is anti-Christian.

  • Little-Kiwi

    and this is why the gay children of Bill O’Reilly fans either become

    1. suicide statistics
    2. kids who flee their homes and leave their bigot parents behind
    3. become cowardly self-loathing GOProud-style resentful homosexual suckups

    shame on Faux News. congrats, boys. you just got more blood on your hands this holiday season.

  • Kieran

    Interesting how these media morons know its perfectly okay to accuse the gay community of being behind the ‘War on Christmas’, but know better then to even insinuate that Jews were behind the “War”. We all know all hell would break loose if they ever dared to go there.

  • alexoloughlin

    What a hypocrite O’Reilly is. This is the same married guy who was caught sexually harassing a female employee and paid her off not to take it to court, the same guy who believes in the sanctity of marriage and trying to impose a religious belief on others who aren’t religious or aren’t even ‘christian’, not that I would call him a ‘christian’ since he’s always judging and condemning others. He’s not only a douche, but a hypocrite and a bigot.

    What exactly is this war he’s talking about? Last time I checked, the stores are packed, christmas songs are played on every radio station, they’re on tv, stores are decorated, people are spending and spending to buy gifts and nothing has changed. Dumb ass and a delusional one at that.

  • alexoloughlin

    @Cam: Yes, and christmas trees have absolutely NOTHING to do with christmas either.

  • Little-Kiwi

    for Christmas, O’reilly wants a falafel to rub into his female employee’s boobs.

  • ryanhn

    @BJ McFrisky: The article clearly states that O’Reilly’s comments were following the lead of McGuirk. That O’Reilly’s comments were after the fact doesn’t make his any less ridiculous or offensive.

  • Little-Kiwi

    McFrisky is what happens when a gay boy is raised by O’Reilly-loving bigoted parents and never grows the balls to stand up to them.

  • AxelDC

    O’Reilly knows about as much about gays as he does economics: practically nothing.

    Remember his scary “Lesbian gangs” a few years back who allegedly beat up other girls over boys? What kind of lesbians fight over a guy?

    Gays love Xmas. Who do you think does Martha Stewarts Xmas tree? The closest thing to a gay war on Xmas is the battle over who has the most festive Xmas party.

    O’Reilly is just a hatemonger who loves beating up on gays because he sees us as an easy target. People are tired of his nonsense, which is why Republicans lost on election night and gay marriage won.

  • gjg64

    Gays are against Christmas?????? PLEASE!!!!! Have you seen some queens homes at Christmas??……we keep the market in antique ornaments, Nativity Scenes,and Pink Aluminum Christmas Trees afloat! And we buy car loads of poinsettias and evergreen.

    And what’s with all this about being against Charlie Brown he was going on about? Everyone knows Linus is gay; and he has the best scene in the Charlie Brown Christmas Special.

    Bill O’Reilly needs to get out more, or at least meet some more gay guys.

  • Joe

    Oh My Goodness Mr. Bill
    I am a (just outed red neck gay) that has alwasy stood behind every think that you and Mr.Shawn has stood up for. I even enjoy listening to Mr.Rush as well. You all have every U.S CITIZEN in your best interest when you have your chats with other on your program.

    I will have to say, I among many gay men and women do not agree with the whole gay marriage thing. I feel that if they want to be able to live as married strait people do, then they should be willing to call it something else, not marry but united would be a word that suits me and I’m sure will not suit everyone.

    Please Mr. Bill, Let’s worry about the obamanation that is going on in DC and not so much of things that really don’t matter to a hill of beans.

    I think Conservative’s should have their own president as well as leberals. Just saying.

    Joseph: Melbourne, Arkansas (red neck country)

  • Jay

    If there were such a thing as a war on Christmas, the Christians won. I mean, has any of these morons actually *been* to America between Thanksgiving and New Years?

  • ChuckHoover1967

    What is Bill O’Reilly so upset about? He’s not even a Christian himself, he’s part of a cult, invented by a false prophet. If anyone is trying to lead people astray, it’s him and it’s more subtle because he pretends to be Christian to lure people away from God.

    The other thing, all this whining about “Keep Christ in Christmas” started with retailers not using the term “Christmas” in ads. OMG!! They aren’t using the birth of the savior to promote sales (Like God is Washington or Lincoln for President’s Day Sales).

    Christians need to be a little less worried about keeping Christ in Christmas and focus on getting him in their lives the other 364 days.

  • BJ McFrisky

    @ryanhn: But you just said it: O’Reilly only responded to McGuirk’s comment—O’Reilly did not make the comment himself. Hence, targeting O’Reilly, rather than McGuirk, is misleading.
    @2eo: You’re a BRIT?!? A freaking foreigner? Holy shit, I can’t believe I’ve wasted so many ketstrokes on you regarding political issues, when you’re not even an American (which, as far as I’m concerned, means you’re not even a real person). Go back to your meat-pies and stop telling yourself that your opinions are of importance to the affairs of other nations. Is your life truly that empty that you immerse yourself in the politics of other countries? Jesus, talk about your trolls.

  • the other Greg

    @2eo: Yes, you Brits have a lot to answer for.

    Because of that Potato Famine in Ireland, we Americans got stuck with the McFrisky family!

    Also, come to think of it, the O’Reillys and McGuirks.

  • 2eo

    @the other Greg: Indeed, Shame we didn’t do a better job with the muskets and embargo a couple of hundred years ago. Imagine how much better life would be if these people were stopped 10 generations ago.

  • Guillermo3

    @Joe: Right,the other Greg,if only
    we’d had whiskey-tipped nuclear missiles!Would have missed Yeats

  • Caliban

    What’s this bullshit about ALL Christian opposing gay marriage and abortion? That’s one big problem with the Religious Right and Catholics like (I assume) O’Reilly. THEY don’t like abortion and gay rights and if you don’t agree with them, as many denominations and individuals don’t, you’re not “really” a Christian?

    Hell, most US Catholics support gay marriage no matter what that hateful old fuck in the Vatican says. Many Episcopalians support gay marriage and don’t care that much about abortion. Protestant denominations are all over the place about both things. They have found a theological basis to ignore the few mentions of homosexuality. Like most of the US population, many LGBT people ARE Christian. So why doesn’t Bill O’Reilly or any of the other fundie fucks ever mention that?

    There is a move afoot to tell the Religious Right to STFU and go back to their prayer closets where they belong instead of meddling in CIVIL LAW, where they don’t belong. To stop trying to get their RELIGIOUS beliefs taught in public school science classrooms. People are rightly sick of their shit.

    But what does that have to do with O’Reilly’s imaginary “War on Christmas”?

  • hephaestion

    O’Reilly’s ignorance knows no bounds. Without us gays, there IS no fucking Christmas! Handel’s Messiah? Written by gay GF Handel. The Nutcracker Suite? Written by gay Tchaikovsky. Who sings Christmas songs better than gay Johnny Mathis? And who does sparkly decorations better than us? O’Reilly is a lecherous old pervert who wouldn’t know Christmas if it bit him in the ass!

  • doug105

    @alexoloughlin: Jeremiah 10:1-25 ESV / 166 helpful votes

    Hear the word that the Lord speaks to you, O house of Israel. Thus says the Lord: “Learn not the way of the nations, nor be dismayed at the signs of the heavens because the nations are dismayed at them, for the customs of the peoples are vanity. A tree from the forest is cut down and worked with an axe by the hands of a craftsman. They decorate it with silver and gold; they fasten it with hammer and nails so that it cannot move. Their idols are like scarecrows in a cucumber field, and they cannot speak; they have to be carried, for they cannot walk. Do not be afraid of them, for they cannot do evil, neither is it in them to do good.” …

    Sound like anything you’ve ever heard of ?

  • Taliaferro

    Huh? What difference does it make who first said it? O’Reilly and Fox have invented this so-called war and are using it to villify minorities once again. You imply that O’Reilly deserves no censure – it is he, and Fox, who are keeping this travesty alive. I don’t understand your comment or why you take umbrage. Are you a member of the LGBT community or perhaps GOProud or the Log Cabin ilk?

  • el polacko

    long ago, we allowed the gay rights movement to be co-opted by leftist politics and we are paying the price for it. we have become touchstones, representative of the leftist mind-set and political goals which are what these fellows are criticizing. there ARE people, on the left, who are actively seeking to diminish and demean the practice of religion and who relish in spoiling the fun of christmas for others. that those people can so easily be classified as being part and parcel of ‘the gay agenda’ is our own fault for allowing our, originally, non-partisan movement to be diverted from the fight for our own rights to worrying about every other issue on the leftist political agenda, lumping us into the laundry list of groups representing the left rather than ourselves.

  • el polacko

    @Taliaferro: why would you attempt to vilify our fellow gay citizens who belong to groups like goproud and log cabin?? they are as much a part of the ‘LGBT community’ as you are. we should be supporting each other as gay people rather than dividing ourselves because of political beliefs or party associations.

  • Guillermo3

    @el polacko: Hard to resist
    playing with your tag,el polacko,but why not go back to your gulag
    in Juarez?

  • Guillermo3

    @el polacko: In that case,el polacko,
    perhaps you should re-read,reconsider,and delete your comment #26,
    denigrating leftists?Are you working very hard to reinforce
    ethnic stereotypes?

  • el polacko

    @Guillermo3: no no.. you misunderstand me. i don’t care if your politics are on the left, right, middle or you belong to the purple party. what i’m bemoaning is, rather than standing on its own and being all-inclusive, the gay liberation movement allowed itself, on the ‘you scratch our back, we’ll scratch yours’ theory, to be sucked into being just another cause representative of ‘the left’. you see can see, by the frequent demonization of those whose politics lean right as being ‘not really gay’ somehow, how deeply the adherence to democrat/leftist politics trumps the gay rights agenda as it stands today.

  • dbmyers

    @Joe: I’m inclinded to believe you are either (1.) a troll who is really stupid and even if you are gay (which I doubt), a truly bigot ignoramous or (2.) a sarcastic poster trying to portray the stupidity and ignorance of the typical “red-neck” homophobic followers of Fox News. Can’t say as I can really tell which is the reality, nor do I care.

  • el polacko

    so…to bring it back to this clip, o’reilly and mcguirk are not blaming gay people, as individuals, for attacking their traditions and values, they are citing gay groups as one of the branches of leftist politics…which, today, is largely true. they could have not made such associations in the 50’s and 60’s when the american homophile movements was very conservative. at that time, however, no person was turned away because of their politics…what bound us together was that we were all GAY. it wasn’t until the mid-70’s that you saw unions, socialists, communists, abortion supporters and other such groups participating in ‘gay pride’ marches. it’s hard to blame someone who sees such associations for assuming that we’re part of the problem that they are facing when it comes to defending their way of life. rather than demonizing them, we need to have much more outreach to those of other political persuasions so that they no longer see us as ‘the other’ but rather as a part of their own. gay people who “are everywhere” as the old slogan said.

  • sangsue


    Why should they when you’re doing it? I have news for you dearheart. There is such a thing as gay Jews. And lesbian Jews. And Bisexual Jews. Even Trans Jews. So take your hatred for Jews and shove it.

  • sangsue

    @el polacko:

    Another Jew hater. Lovely.

  • dbmyers

    @el polacko: What utter clap trap! You must be a log cabin republican “gay” appologist troll. Time to change your party or your perspective.

  • dbmyers

    @el polacko: Those of us on the left believe in the idea that an attack on one minority’s rights is an attack on all minority’s rights, therefore we do believe in and work toward establishing a rainbow coalition that protects everybodies rights. We like to learn from history! Or as Pastor Martin Niemoller so incisively put it(after the fact):

    “First they came for the communists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

    Then they came for the socialists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.

    Then they came for the trade unionists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

    Then they came for me,
    and there was no one left to speak for me.” Pastor Martin Niemoller – Germany 1945.

  • Redpalacebulleaglesox

    Bill-o the Defamer lives down to his reputation established when he defamed the US Army over Malmedy. Now he’s joined by McGuirk the Jerk. Lay down with vermin, wake up with bubonic plague.

  • erikwm

    Bill O’Reilly is dumb. The true threat to Christmas is not that people will stop celebrating it. It’s the secularization of the holiday.

    Look, I love Christmas. I will ALWAYS celebrate Christmas. But do I care about the religious origins of Christmas? Not at all!

    Bill O’Reilly — You can’t make me stop celebrating Christmas in my own secular way. LOL

  • Guillermo3

    @Guillermo3: Don’t often reply to
    myself,do I Guillermo3?-NO,you don’t,Guillermo3.-But my comment
    #21 was not meant to be addressed to Joe,but to the other Greg,
    and possibly to 2eo.

  • MK Ultra

    Fox news knows their audience.
    Justin Bieber –> teenage girls
    = Fox news —> far righters

    We all know this man isn’t paid to discuss news.
    O Reilly is paid to whip his audience up into a faux self righteous frenzy of paranoia.
    His audience aren’t the brightest dildos in the sex shop, if you hadn’t noticed.
    I don’t even know if O Reilly himself believes half the shit he says. He is an opportunist putting on a show for the consumption of a dim witted crowd. Not a bad gig.

  • Guillermo3

    @el polacko: No,el polacko,I’m afraid
    I DO UNDERSTAND.Yes,Everyone has the right to whatever political
    beliefs/party allegiances he chooses.However,I can’t but believe
    that Republican gays are foolish to adhere to the party backed by
    the FRC,Focus on the Family,Dom,and other fag-haters.

  • BJ McFrisky

    @el polacko: Thank you for acknowledging that being homosexual does not make us all of a singular mindset. The Left has co-opted the miltant fringe of us who disdain anyone—gay or straight—who doesn’t toe the liberal line.

  • Little-Kiwi

    explain with specifics what “the liberal line” is.

    you mean how we have the spines and integrity to stand up for social justice, and refuse to cower before bigotry and prejudice?

    i’m always confused as to why gay republicans are so proud of their inability to stand up to their trash bigoted parents….

  • wllmjunior

    @Caliban: Christians have as much right to influence “CIVIL LAW” as anybody else in this country. The notion that morality can’t be legislated is pile of crap. It’s legislated every day. It’s just a matter of who’s. You’ve got your battles to fight and so do the Christians. They’ve just got God on their side despite their glaring faults.

  • Ste

    Why would the networks play “The Greatest Story Ever Told” at Christmas? That’s an Easter movie. Who writes these articles?

  • wllmjunior

    @Ste: People who speak of things they really know nothing about, and as usual it’s the “Christian Haters.” Being everything they claim they hate in “The Christians.” But then again, We Hate in Others Those Things We See in Ourselves. They should darken the door of a Christian church sometime and meet some real ones instead of believing bigoted stereotypes of the “Christian” characters fed to them by TV. Christians are not the problem here. Ignorance is where the problem lies. Real unadulterated ignorance.

  • Eric Auerbach

    @Ste: What’s wrong with playing a guy’s biopic on his birthday? Makes sense to me.

  • 2eo

    @Little-Kiwi: Sadly this will go ignored, you should know BJ and el polaco are the same poster, the IP addresses are a match so it is conclusive.

  • 2eo

    @Little-Kiwi: Also because that was clumsily constructed I was agreeing completely with you, and meant to end the sentence after ignored. :)

  • hyhybt

    @2eo: I know I’ve asked this before, but please, for once, have the basic decency to answer. How could you possibly know any user’s IP address here unless you are Queerty staff (no vague cheat of an answer here, either)?

    (Also, it’s not only possible, but quite easy for more than one person to post from the same IP address. It’s even possible for them not to know each other, though that’s hardly likely.)

  • Guillermo3

    @BJ McFrisky: Full of Shit,
    as usual,BJ.At least you’re consistent.

  • BJ McFrisky

    @hyhybt: 2eo doesn’t have an answer for who anyone is on this site. It has claimed I post under numerous names, but unless I’m mistaken, Queerty prevents this, so 2eo’s claims are provably unfounded. The problem with 2eo is, It thinks all gay people have only one mind, that none of us could possibly think for ourselves, and that if one of us is in fact independent-minded, then that’s an affront to It and the other zombies who all think the same way.
    So the short answer is no, 2eo won’t answer your question about knowing anyone’s IP address, because It knows nothing. All It wants to do is silence anyone who disagrees with It. I’d point out how typical this is of the Left, but I’d just sound redundant.

  • Little-Kiwi

    understand this, fellas – if McFrisky didn’t distract himself by coming on here every day to anonymously complain about liberals he’d already have shot himself.

    so let him play. anonymously complaining about liberals the only thing that distracts him from the reality that his parents wish they’d paid for that abortion…

  • 2eo

    @Little-Kiwi: You know that explains BJ and his posting, he isn’t because of his parents, his family hate him because they know as we all do that the world would have being better without him.

    @hyhybt: I won’t divulge anything to give away how it is done.

  • hyhybt

    @2eo: wait a minute. Aren’t you the same guy who sometimes rants about a supposed conspiracy on Queerty’s part because they don’t write stories about the Mormon just because it hasn’t done anything newsworthy?

  • Guillermo3

    @Little-Kiwi: Yes,Little Kiwi!_
    That’s why 500th trimester abortins should be legalized.

  • Guillermo3

    @Little-Kiwi: Yes,Little Kiwi!_
    That’s why 500th trimester abortions should be legalized.

  • BJ McFrisky

    @2eo: For a Brit, your use of the English language is maddeningly atrocious. Look at the things you type. It’s like word-murder. Your teachers would be ashamed to the point of suicide-inducing humiliation.
    And as far as your response to El Polacko goes, of COURSE you won’t divulge your mystical powers to the rest of us plebian peasants, for that would betray the mystery and power that you hold over all of us.
    As they say in your island country, “Rubbish.” Or, more appropriately, “Wanker.”

  • 2eo

    @hyhybt: No, you’re thinking of Cam. I have pointed out that one of Queerty’s lead advertising sponsors is a mormon owned company named Outbrain, who have used their leverage to get articles pulled on other sites and blogs before. Seen as I don’t see mormons very often, thankfully living in the north of England so they don’t rank highly on my giveatoss-o-meter.

    I also don’t see the relevance or connection between asking about OMGLEETHAXORSKILLZ and criticising the whitewashing of mormon actions against civilisation. Quite a jump between the topics even you should admit. Not sure where you were going with that.

  • 2eo

    @BJ McFrisky: Aww bless.

  • tidalpool

    This homo is completely and totaly in love with christmas. I still Oooh and Aaah over well lite houses, I adore christmas music in the malls and in the villages, as long as the music was not recorded after 1960. I love giving and receiving dumb gifts, precious gifts and making memories for all the kids in my family. I love spending time baking and decoratinf, and lighting candles and inviting friends over for moose milk..Tell ya later..going to midnight mass, always attending the nutcracker (no puns please) and of course watching scrooge get the bejesus scared out of him by the spirits.
    To many people worry about the changing of life as we all ‘used’ to know it. I can not keep the world from going its own way, but I can keep every tradition I ever loved about Christmas alive and well as long as I am alive. To all of you, cranky goofballs who worry about the rest of the world, to sharp tongue queers who waste time in responding to those same goofballs, MERRY CHRISTMAS! may god’s light shine on you and yours, and rotect you from evil and grant you the peace and love all humans seek. MOOSE MILK, I TBLSP sweetened condensed milk, in a coffee mug, one entire cinnamonstick, 2-3 shots of your favorite bourbon, fill up the cup with boiling water, ad a dash of nutmeg, and hold under your knose and stir with cinnamon stick until it is cool enough to drink, remember, smelling it is required. Lovely drink, lovely times, lovely christmas. (btw, I always buy a bottle of White shoulders perfume, and spray all my light bulbs before the guests arrive, it goes perfectly with the simmering apples and spices in my crock pot to set the right scent for the evening….just sayin

  • hyhybt

    @2eo: No connection, except for thinking the two came from the same person. Sorry about the error.

  • sangsue


    Actually there’s a separation of church and state so no, Christian law is not supposed to influence civil law. Try again.

  • Stache1

    OMG legalized drugs and the elimination of christmas. Sounds good to me. Talk about mirroring yourself. Were trying to take away their fun? Palease hypriciaal lying assholes. That’s all these nutbags do is try to take away others right and of coarse fun. We need drugs to deal with these assholes. @MK Ultra:
    Best comment and really hits the nail on the head.

  • Charles175

    These and those like them claim that they have the answers to the issues of society. Yet these same ones and others like them, in their actions do the opposite. These, with their big mouths, divide the people. As the saying goes, a divided house shall not stand. O’Reilly gets a yearly salary of $20 million for this purpose. Limbaugh got $100 million per year to do the same thing. These are only concerned about ratings that stuff to the gill, their already overly fleeced wallets. On the other hand, if one reads and understands the life and purpose of Jesus the Christ, then one understands the truth. A form of truth that is not in these talking heads. These already have their reward now.

  • Pix

    @el polacko:

    First, the War on Christmas is a hoax, a mix of urban legends and a marketing ploy (the Mississippi-based American Family Association said it would expand to Easter, which it did, after it sold more than 500,000 buttons & 125,000 bumper stickers bearing the slogan “Merry Christmas: It’s Worth Saying.”) Of course O’Reilly capitalizes on it, though I doubt he’ll ever outdo himself as his piece on so-called lesbian gangs, which would’ve been funny to me (as it was so over the top) had I not found out about it because a Christian at the shooting range who didn’t know I’m a lesbian warned me about the Pink Pistols and to shoot to kill. (And btw, more than one mass shooting was inspired by people on Fox News, stories that weren’t at all true anymore than O’Reilly’s garbage.)
    And as to why go after GOProud and Log Cabin…for years I did not, and I liked the idea of making Republicans gay inclusive because that would both ease up our troubles AND politicians would have to start keeping their promises to us rather than throwing us under the bus knowing we’re not going to vote against them in the next election (as the Democrats have often done). But not anymore, because they’re not fighting for gay rights from a conservative perspective, they’re just drinking the kool aid now. They believe FOX News (which has argued openly in court it has the right to lie and was thus in their rights to fire reporters who refused to do so and won) and gave the most insane reasons that had no basis in reality, like saying Obama is after our guns despite he’s been one of the most friendly POTUS to gun owners who not only tolerated people carrying guns to where he was speaking and waving signs about watering the tree of liberty with the blood of tyrants (contrast with Bush & Rice who had protesters jailed simply for showing up with shirts criticizing them or the war in Iraq) and even undid the ban that “guns for everyone” Ronald Reagan so that gun owners allowed to carry could carry them into national forests.

    Another one is that Obama took his so-called “Obama care” from a conservative think tank and was promoted as an alternative to Canadian UHC and “Hillarycare” and passed by such Republicans as Romney before Obama ran with it…but show them where Romney passed it first and they’re still saying “Have to vote for Romney to end Obamacare or America is doomed.” Like WTF? I’ve heard of brain scans that show people with strong political feelings (not just Republicans) actually experience pleasure ignoring inconvenient facts so that it was hard to have a rational debate with them but that’s just frightening, like seeing people under a magic spell that hijacks their free will. That’s downright cultish.

    And GOProud officially endorsed Romney despite that he not only promoted much the same thing as Obama, his only real difference of note is that he openly said he would continue is to bash gays as he did as governor…and even if Romney pulled another flip flop his VP Ryan was a Gilead-style fundie who was very clear in his effort to destroy all gains made by gays (while his economic policies were similar in many ways to Romney, and even Obama, in industrial bailouts, etc). So there’s little ACTUAL difference between them SAVE Obama is the best POTUS the gay community has ever had (much to my surprise) while the others was saying they weren’t just going to ignore gay rights they were going to actively reverse each and every gain. But despite this I MIGHT give the GOProud the benefit of a doubt IF they harped on their antigay crusade and demanded the letters condemning it to pour in (“I’m a Republican, but if you want my vote, stop bashing gays”), not to mention trying to shame the Republican candidates for accepting support of evangelicals who get “kill the gays” bills passed in Africa (showing what they ultimately want to happen here, and obviously believe the Republican Party is their best way to Gilead). But they don’t, so they lost my benefit of a doubt.

    At best, GOProud are suffering something similar as a battered woman who excuses her abuser even as he threatens to kill her (and how it’s all her fault), and at worst they’re an intentional front to get gays on their side (like getting turkeys to vote for Thanksgiving), and don’t put that past them, major Republican politicians were busted when a memo came out showing their secret support of exploiting the religious conservative backgrounds of many blacks and Latinos to vote against gays. Heck, Republican cultists (not to be confused with the sane Republicans who stopped supporting the current Party after 2010) have been found posting on this very site pretending to be gay, so the worst case scenerio really isn’t far fetched at all.

  • dbmyers

    Pix: You have posted a great summary of why GOP Proud and the Log Cabin Republicans do a diservice to GLBTQ rights efforts. They will excuse any and all antics from the bigots in their party. I agree completely with your detailed analysis. Thanks for posting it.

  • 2eo

    @hyhybt: If you must know, there is an exploit in the Apache code, which allows the reading of server transactions, in this case the comments and some of the meta data underneath if you know what to look for.

    Nothing illegal, merely using Linux, not particularly advanced, if I want that stuff done I have a few contacts.

  • Caliban

    @wllmjunior: You’re full of shit.

    They actually DON’T have the right to codify their religious beliefs and standards in secular, civil law.

    What’s the biggest objection to gay civil rights? “Well the BIBLE says…” Here’s a newsflash: The Bible says all sorts of shit and it’s been used to support slavery, segregation, the burning of “witches, pogroms against Jews, and not allowing women to vote. In fact, if the “One Million Moms” really followed Biblical rules they’d STFU and go bake a pie.

  • the other Greg

    With some reluctance, I have to say that I actually do HATE CHRISTMAS. This is because of working in retail for some years. (I have three part-time jobs & one is in retail.) It’s been driving me batsh*t crazy since mid-October and now there’s the fucking music, which totally sucks. I have to wash out my ears with Led Zeppelin when I get home. I hated my childhood and have no happy Xmas memories there either. I hate Xmas, I hate everything about it, bah hambug!

    Besides that, Xmas trees are dangerous! They cause thousands of fires every year and kill people!

    If there really is a “war” against Xmas, I don’t necessarily want to sign up, but can I be a conscientious objector and just ignore the whole thing? I hope next year I’m prosperous enough to give up that retail job and just ignore the whole thing.

  • Guillermo3

    @2eo: “2eo:James 2eo.” As a
    digital retard,2eo,I have no idea what you’re talking about.However,
    if BJ and el are the same “person”}HORRORS_____Reminds me of an ancient,
    bad ethnic joke about a camel with 2 assholes.

  • sunnfla

    BUT DAMNIT HE”S RIGHT! THEY ARE RIGHT! Why can’t we GAYS own up to our own attitudes..JUST LIKE OTHER SECTORS…and how soon we forget…HE..and the CONSERVATIVES are entitled to think differently!! WHY DO “WE” have to bash them?…just because they bash us?

  • the other Greg

    I doubt that BJ and El Polacko are the same person, they have much different writing styles. But even if they are the same person, so what? Before we all had to register as “members” here, it was probably a lot easier to do the sock-puppet thing. Now they would need to log in, log out, log in again, log out again, all pretty time-consuming. But I encountered this situation on a recent thread – three posters were ganging up on me, all with about a 25 comment history, all with the exact same writing style, saying the same nonsense, ignoring what I was actually saying. I figured “they” were the same (mentally ill) person, but so what, it still was up to me to come up with cogent retorts. Or not – I could go hiking in the woods or something.

    I don’t agree with BJ’s politics, but he’s never offensive (IMO) and he’s occasionally amusing. If any of us doesn’t agree with some ridiculous thing he writes – and I often don’t – we are all free to attempt sensible replies.

    I’m always mystified by certain pearl-clutching commenters on Queerty who piously decry all the “anonymity” here. Who gives a fuck? Ironically, they are always hypocritically anonymous themselves!

    I’ve never seen anyone b*tch about this so-called problem on any other site, hypocritically or otherwise. (Maybe it’s a “gay” thing, like always being late, or smoking?) Have they really never noticed all the grownup sites that allow pseudonymous comments such as The New York Times, the Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, the Telegraph, the Atlantic, Salon, Reason, Politico, Slate, HuffPo etc. etc. etc.?

    It’s Queerty’s already-stated policy that anonymity in comments is fine with them.

  • hyhybt

    @2eo: Thanks; that’s plenty close enough. It’s still possible, though, for two different people to post from the same address.

    @the other Greg: You don’t, then, see any difference between not having to use your own name, but still having only one identity per site, and pretending to be multiple people? I’m not taking any position about whether anyone’s actually doing that here, but it seems to me to be totally unlike in purpose and effect.

    (As for logging in and out, that’s probably not necessary. You could use two different devices, say a computer and a phone, or you could use separate browsers and just click between them.)

  • the other Greg

    @hyhybt: Obviously there’s a “difference.” They are similar non-problems though, in that worrying about them seems pretty pointless.

    What can a Queerty editor do about someone pretending to be multiple people? Maybe nothing if, as in your example, the offender is using a computer & phone at the same time.

    What can a Queerty reader do about it? Again the short answer is, nothing really. You can call him on it (as I did in the case I mentioned), and of course he’ll deny it. (Do they ever admit it?) So, (1) maybe it’s true and the shame chases him away, (2) maybe it’s true and he doesn’t give a sh*t about the charge, (3) maybe it’s not true. The sock-puppet charge doesn’t affect the opinions expressed. You still have to respond to the opinions (or ignore them).

    To be general about it, as a liberal I usually don’t find it THAT hard to believe that there might be two or more gay conservatives posting here on some hot topic. It seems odd to me that the automatic assumption of so many posters here is… EEK, they must be the same person!

  • Little-Kiwi

    it’s just the reality – there are some people who can only make their comments whilst using the internet as a burqa.

    such big manly tough empowered gay men….commenting anonymously. oh well.

    life in the closet does drive people crazy, so it’s to be expected.

  • dbmyers

    Using the internet as a burqa – hilarious! What color is your burqa Little-Kiwi? I use my true name and I am not big, nor manly, nor effeminate, nor in the closet (not since 1971). In my experience, bigots and haters are the most likely to wear the burqa, but there still are gays and lesbians who could lose their jobs or suffer discrimination and hatred (especially in the US), so it is understandable. Less understandable for bigots and homophobes!

  • the other Greg

    @dbmyers: Great comment! My boyfriend has two theories about “Kiwi”: (1) he wants everyone to post pix so he can make fun of how they look, or how old they are, etc. (& he’s too dumb to realize the pix might not be real anyway) & (2) he can’t tell us his real name – he’s been asked point blank several times – because he doesn’t have a green card and would be deported (he’s a Canadian living in NYC, or says so anyway).

    He professes to care soooo much about the plight of bullied gay kids, and then he makes an astonishingly vile self-hating homophobic comment like “big manly tough empowered gay men”! – ya, that’s real helpful to those poor bullied gay kids. Oh, and if you’re gay and don’t live in New York City you live in “bumfuck nowhere” (quote!) so he doesn’t give a sh*t about your petty little worries about people getting fired, etc. Nice!

    @Little-Kiwi: Uh, “Little Kiwi”… YOU’RE ANONYMOUS. You’re using a pseudonym. Is there something about this concept you don’t get?

    Queerty doesn’t require commenters to post pictures, or link to fabulous YouTube videos, etc. If someone is unhappy about this policy, maybe they can stop being a busybody telling Queerty how to run their site, and get their own site. Oh right, you already did that and you’re still whining.

    Queerty doesn’t care if posters use screen names. That is their stated policy. If someone is unhappy with the policy they can go over to the Advocate which allows only Facebook comments and is dull as your endless yammering about parents. Queerty is in good company since The New York Times, the Globe and Mail in Toronto, the Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, the Telegraph, the Atlantic, Salon, Reason, Politico, Slate, HuffPo etc etc etc all seem never to have noticed that screen name comments are supposedly a problem. Guess what – Little Kiwi’s Word Museum of Terror and Hypocrisy is in this august company, it allows pseudonymous comments too! I’m sure “Choklit Daddy” (for instance) is a nice guy, but I’m guessing that’s probably not the name on his driver’s license, nor is the picture on it a cartoon drawing.

    So why are screen name comments a problem here on Queerty, and only here? And why do you write about all kinds of interesting things on your OWN site, but when you come here you only say the same boring stuff over & over about parents? And what does any of this have to do with the “War on Xmas”?

  • Little-Kiwi

    oh, i just realized that some of you may not be tech-savvy.

    click my name, see who i am.

    clearly, this is a concept greg doesn’t get. ask your imaginary boyfriend to help you with that ;-)

  • the other Greg

    @Little-Kiwi: I was aware LK was a literary reference to Ethan Mordden, & said so to you once. Queerty is fine with that, they don’t care who you are, and few Queerty readers care either. That’s a concept you don’t get. But I’m sorry I missed the interesting article – I was on vacation 9/28 which for us involves an internet-free week & a half (must be your idea of hell!).

    So… if some recently-out, recently-bullied young person were to post here with a screen name and no pix, and nothing to justify his existence (in your busybody kibbutzing opinion, not Queerty’s), does he get a pass? At what point does he have to start making videos – 25, 27? What if he’s f*g-bashed at 27, do you give him a break then? And what if he lives in “bumfuck nowhere” and has to deal with the possibility of being harassed, fired, or assaulted if he’s openly gay all over the internet? That’s another concept you don’t get, but I can’t figure out why, considering your childhood experience being bullied.

    It’s funny that Queerty thought you and your mother were not related! Maybe they were making a sly, inside joke about your parent obsession?

  • Little-Kiwi

    i understand that your obsession with me takes precedence over your reading comprehension skills.

    i’ve never said “all queerty members need to not be anonymous” – merely pointed out that the biggest complainers always are. the trolls who slander liberal gays, effeminate gays, all those other gays. always boastful posts from cowards whose bravado can only exist whilst commenting anonymously.


    yet another point you choose to ignore in order to fixate on me. how’s the meth-addiction recovery going?

  • the other Greg

    @Little-Kiwi: ??? – I’m a liberal whose politics you’ve never disagreed with, that I’ve noticed, and I’ve never disagreed with yours particularly either.

    Really, you don’t want anyone to be “obsessed” with you? After you put videos of yourself all over the place? :) Even if I think you’re a bit hypocritical, am I still allowed to be a fan? Of your own site, anyway, if not your oddly monomaniacal parent comments here.

    In real life I’m mostly concerned with HIV issues. I’ve written a lot here about it to counter the appalling ignorance in Queerty comments about it. (which however, seem to be getting a little better, I think.) I’ve written often here about being in a sero-discordant relationship. Coming out as HIV+ is often even tougher for people than coming out as gay. (Well it didn’t seem to bother Andrew Sullivan much, but he’s an attention hound like you! – even if he is a self-described conservative.)

    My point in THIS thread (which was originally about 2eo not you, sorry oh narcissus) was, so what if the gay conservatives are “anonymous”? OK I suppose it’s vaguely interesting that they tend to be that way, but THAT hardly seems the salient problem with them! I’ve never seen anyone else, on any site, complain about that. And that parent thing, it’s probably true, as I’ve said to you, but on the list of things to object to about them, that seems to me down around #47 on the list.

    It’s up to us to come up with cogent, sensible responses to the gay conservatives’ gibberish. When we’re HERE we are just typing and hopefully, making a sensible counter-argument. Why not just counter their arguments?

  • the other Greg

    @Little-Kiwi: The problem with gay conservatives isn’t their “anonymity.” The problem with gay conservatives is their arguments. So we need to counter their arguments.

  • Guillermo3

    @dbmyers: dbmyers,I applaud you on
    your courage!I,of course,have no idea how old you are[I’m 65],but
    I didn’t even know that I’m gay until a couple of years after you
    came out,didn’t begin outing myself until 15,or so,years later.
    However,I think little Kiwi’s hilarious burka comment has some
    validity.From the small number of comments it is reported that
    you’ve made,I gather that you are a fairly recent addition to
    QUEERTY readership.My point is that little Kiwi,myself,and many
    others have witnessed lots of “burka-ed” self-hating homos
    [many probably deep in denial]make viciously hateful homophobic
    harangues.My guess[and that of some other commenter s]is that
    most of them are deeply closeted/angry with themselves/guilty and
    that displacing their anger onto others gives them momentary relief.
    Perhaps this activity lets them spend more time in that deep river,
    Denial.Often,after many venomous exchanges,the hateful homos are
    blocked from further commenting.Occasionally,they are simply barking
    up the wrong tree:I remember one young guy,who made equations with
    homosexual activity[in his view,a biologically unnatural thing]with
    drug addiction.After several heated exchanges,he admitted to reading
    and posting on a blog from the HRC.

  • MartinDK

    @wllmjunior: thank you for your comment. So true! I couldnt agree more

  • dbmyers

    @wllmjunior: Sorry, but yes, some christians are the problem. I have no problem with what I call “true christians” – those who practice the golden rule in their daily lives. But there are plenty of fundamentalist right-wing christians who do feel it is their right and their duty to impose their religious beliefs upon the rest of us. Since the US is a secular government whose Constitution has been interpreted by the US Supreme Court to guarantee “seperation of church and state”, neither christians(fundamnentalists or other-wise)nor any other religion has the right to impose their beliefs upon the rest of us.

  • dbmyers

    @Guillermo3: Thanks for your background info as, yes, I am a relatively new poster here. I too am 65. I am a dual US/Canadian citizen living in Vancouver (voting absentee in federal elections from Minnesota) and am a retired GLTBQ rights activist for over 40 years. It is useful to know some background on members (and history) here, so thanks. I too get very frustrated with Log Cabin Republicans and the even more with the more right-wing GOProuds. They both often seem, to me, to be of the mentality of “I got mine Jack” and “I’m alright Jack!”,(which, coincidentally, is the true mantra of the 2%). I encourage all posters here to sign up for the HRC newsletter and consider being a member and or donating to them:

    They’ve done wonders these past four years and especially during this last election cycle where they and others spent nearly a million and a half helping to defeat the Minnesota Ban gay marriage state constitutional amendment (for the future as it is not yet legal in Minnesota). The good news is that the amendment failed along with the photo voter ID amendment and the campaign to defeat it resulted in Minnesota having the highest voter turnout in the nation and throwing out the republican majorities in both Minnesota state houses to boot! It may be even possible that the democratic majorities in those two houses will pass a gay marriage act in the future that the democratic governor can sign. That would truly be “just deserts” for the homophobic right in Minnesota.

  • Atomicrob

    The conservative entertainment complex rears its ugly head.

  • ScaryRussianHeather

    You didn’t close your quote on the O’Reilly quote?

    Where’s the blog post where he said he wasn’t against marriage equality because “I want gay people to be happy.” a different night a coupla weeks ago?

  • ginger5010

    my roomate’s mother makes $79 every hour on the internet. She has been out of a job for 5 months but last month her check was $21010 just working on the internet for a few hours. Read more on this site cloud68Dotcom

  • Guillermo3

    @dbmyers: Thanks for your
    thanks,dbmyers,and thanks for telling a little about yourself &
    about your work.I agree about HRC,and have been a member for years
    _just wish their monthly magazine wasn’t so bland.
    The frustrating thing about these sights
    (other than,on THIS SITE, the mysteries of Queerty’s censors
    [unfathomable to me])is that we can trade so little personal
    information safely.

  • Little-Kiwi

    @the other Greg:

    their arguments, as we all know, are baseless and devoid of anything resembling intellectual honesty.

    as exacerbated by their need to say them anonymously, on sites like this.

    if gay republicans online believed a word of what they say, they’d be the Out-est fellas in the country. which they aint.

Comments are closed.