The California Chapter of the Log Cabin Republicans has made their endorsements in GOP primaries for State Legislature, and they are raising some eyebrows…
First and foremost, straight (if I may use that word in a post about gay Republicans) off of the Log Cabin website is this statement under “Why We Exist” —
Log Cabin Republicans work to make the Republican Party more inclusive, particularly on gay and lesbian issues. Equality will be impossible to achieve without Republican votes. Working from inside the Party—educating other Republicans about gay and lesbian issues—is the most effective way to gain new Republican allies for equality. Log Cabin also exists as a voice for GOP values among members of the gay and lesbian community.
Great – we get it. And to the credit of California Log Cabin Director James Vaughn, he and his organization are virtual Energizer Bunnies when it comes to pushing the gay and lesbian agenda within the GOP.
So when Vaughn’s Log Cabin organization released their list of endorsements, it has more "gravitas" than in previous cycles because the assumption (especially given the "Why We Exist" statement above) is that if they endorse in a primary, it is because the candidate they endorse will take them closer to their vision of "gay equality" or that some other candidate in the primary is so against their agenda that they need to stop them from getting the GOP nomination. I suppose it’s also possible that they have endorsed some candidates (especially incumbents) as a matter of spreading good will (such as their endorsement of hardliner Mike Villines, who is the Assembly Republican Leader).
Anyways, you can see ALL of the CA Log Cabin endorsements here.
**There is more – click the link**
May 1st, 2008 at 12:00 am
There you go again, Jon, right off the rails. Why do you care who the Log Cabin group endorses? And why do you care what their criteria is for making endorsements?
May 1st, 2008 at 12:00 am
Jon,
I received the same email from the Log Cabin organization that Russ Bough mentioned.
I never talked with them or filled out any questionnaire and I therefore reject the endorsement.
Sincerely,
Brian Nestande
May 1st, 2008 at 12:00 am
I think it was a mistake for them to give unsolicited endorsements. But if the group feels the candidate or incumbent is inclusive and fits Republican principles giving them an Acceptable rating would be appropriate.
May 2nd, 2008 at 12:00 am
“James Vaughn is actually blocked from responding to this, but here is what he sent Jon earlier today:
Making the headline in Flash Report made my day! I’m happy to respond to relate our criteria for endorsements. We focused on those who advocate for lower taxes, limited government and strong public safety. We didn’t really look much at gay issues, because in California, there is nothing left to do except marriage. Since we presumed that every Republican candidate would have the same position on the freedom to marry as Barbara Boxer, we felt that as a Republican organization, Republicans agreeing with someone as liberal as Boxer made this issue a wash. For those previously in the legislature, we looked at votes in the legislature. If they voted for higher taxes for example, (like Walters did) then we went with the opponent.
We did look at votes on some gay bills last session and that did tip the scales in some cases, but since there were so many pro-gay votes by Republicans last year (see our scorecard on our web site about halfway down http://ca.logcabin.org) it wasn’t a major factor. For new candidates we looked at their publicly available information to make our determination. So we ultimately ended up with candidates we could endorse, those we couldn’t get consensus on or didn’t have enough information and those we felt didn’t have a strong enough Republican record to endorse.
But you make a good point about our mission statement. In California, since there is nothing left to do on gay issues, we need to update it to reflect the change in focus, which is electing Republicans to office. That way we can now tackle the issues of high taxes, invasive job killing bureaucracy and other issues. We just want the CRP and its candidates to realize the gay wars are over (just don’t talk about gay issues if you don’t agree) so we can start winning these swing districts again. We aren’t ignoring the gay issues entirely because there are still people who don’t understand, but that’s a mop up operation. “