quote:

---

Gay GOP Group Challenges Bush on Marriage
Log Cabin Republicans to Air TV Ad in D.C., 7 States

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 10, 2004; Page A06

In a dramatic break with President Bush, a prominent group of gay Republicans that supported him four years ago is launching a $1 million advertising campaign today attacking the administration for trying to ban same-sex marriage.


The ad, by the Log Cabin Republicans, uses grainy footage of Vice President Cheney saying during the 2000 campaign that the matter should be left to the states.

Bush's decision to endorse a constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage was "the line in the sand" for the 27-year-old group, which has never run a campaign ad, said Executive Director Patrick Guerriero. He said he had warned the White House as Bush edged toward supporting an amendment that "despite our historic loyalty to the party and the president, we would be forced to speak out if gay and lesbian families were going to be used as wedge issues in swing states."

The group's move, which shatters the fragile alliance between the president and his strongest backers in the gay community, could undermine efforts to renew the "compassionate conservative" appeal he used four years ago.

The ad shows Cheney in the 2000 vice presidential debate saying of gay marriage: "People should be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to enter into. . . . That matter is regulated by the states. I think different states are likely to come to different conclusions, and that's appropriate. I don't think there should necessarily be a federal policy in this area."

The on-screen tag line says: "We Agree. Don't Amend the Constitution."

Cheney ducked questions about his earlier stance in television interviews last week, telling CNN: "I support the president. . . . He sets policy for the administration." Cheney's office declined to comment.

The 30-second spot likens the gay marriage effort to the civil rights movement, showing a protest scene from the 1960s and a sign that says "Colored Waiting Room."

Bush campaign spokesman Terry Holt said: "We respect differences of opinion in the Republican Party, and we feel that during this election the Republicans will unite behind the president on the big issues facing this country -- the war on terror and growing the economy."

The Log Cabin group, which claims more than 10,000 members, is the largest gay organization in the Republican Party. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) kicked off its convention last year, and top administration officials provided a briefing at this year's gathering. The group's chapters around the country often work with local elected officials.

Asked whether the group could still support Bush, Guerriero said the president has "jeopardized that endorsement" by "the hypocrisy of using this in an election year." He said that his organization has received hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations in the past two weeks and that the ad campaign could be expanded if fundraising continues to surge.

Religious conservatives view the controversy very differently.

"The alternative -- for the president to have offered no solution while some out-of-control judges and mayors were trying to remake one of the most fundamental institutions of our society -- would have been a political disaster of the highest order," said Gary Bauer, who ran against Bush in 2000 and now heads the conservative think tank American Values. "I find it incomprehensible that any Republican, Log Cabin or otherwise, would conclude the president could be agnostic on an issue so fundamental." Bauer said Bush's stance would help him with "culturally conservative" swing voters.

The Log Cabin ad will run on cable and local stations in the District and in seven swing states: Florida, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio and Wisconsin. The ad makes no mention of Cheney's daughter Mary, a lesbian who is working on his reelection campaign, and Guerriero said she should not be dragged into the debate.

Bush called for a constitutional amendment on Feb. 24 after Massachusetts's highest court legalized same-sex marriage and San Francisco's mayor defied state law by allowing the granting of marriage licenses to thousands of gay couples.

Recent polls have shown a majority of Americans opposing same-sex marriage and supporting a constitutional amendment to ban the practice, with Republicans much more likely than Democrats to hold those views. Polling on the subject has been volatile, however, and a Washington Post-ABC News poll taken in the past several days found a majority opposed to such an amendment.

But GOP pollster Tony Fabrizio, who conducted a survey for Log Cabin, said that only 3 percent of likely voters consider marriage an important election issue, and that four out of five who back a constitutional amendment already support Bush. "The people it matters most to in terms of banning gay marriage, he has them," Fabrizio said.

But the president could be hurt among the 25 percent of gays who, according to 2000 exit polls, said they voted for him.

Bush got off to a rocky start with the Log Cabin Republicans in 1999, when, as a candidate, he said he would probably not meet with the group because it would "create a huge political nightmare for people." He reversed himself months later and met with some of the group's local members, and senior administration officials briefed 200 Log Cabin members earlier this year.

"We were the only gay and lesbian group in America to endorse the president in 2000," Guerriero said. "You don't want to be taken for granted in American politics, and I believe we were."

© 2004 The Washington Post Company

---

 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
I've always felt sorry for Log Cabin Republicans; it must feel awful to belong to a party that, for the most part, hates and fears you, only because you don't like taxes.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 
Wow, you managed to both magnify the opposition within the Republican party for homosexuals and trivialize the reasons someone might support it in the same sentence.
 

---

Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
It's a gift.
 

---

Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
 
I'm just happy a group with money is getting around to fighting this issue in the public. As long as Conservative Religious Leaders make this a Christian/Heathen debate, nobody is going to vote for Gay Marriages.

Only when the Gay couples will be shown as real people, with real feelings and needs, will the sympathetic hearts of many voters turn on this issue, allowing for Gay Marriages to be voted into law.
 

---

Posted by romanylass (Member # 6306) on :
 
This is actually good. If all the gay Republicans vote against Bush, it's less likely he will be re-elected.
 

---

Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
 

quote:

---

Only when the Gay couples will be shown as real people, with real feelings and needs, will the sympathetic hearts of many voters turn on this issue, allowing for Gay Marriages to be voted into law.

---

So. . . the 5700 hours of video tape shot in front of the San Fran courthouse WERE fairly useless, huh?


 

---

Posted by John L (Member # 6005) on :
 
When most networks won't give them much (if any) exposure, Scott, then it's easy to see why.

And showing a bunch of touching photos isn't going to change the general conservative nature of this nation. And please note: I say this as a conservative. Additionally, the public is not as stupid as many think: posters and news blips don't change the opinions of most people.
 

---

Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
 
Leto, I don't know what networks you're watching where this issue isn't being given much exposure. . . but there is quite a lot of it on Fox, CNN, MSNBC, and my local channels.

For my part, I agree with Tom-- I don't understand the need to belong to a party that mostly despises your life choices. Isn't the stance of these Republicans tantamount to putting money before love?

Which, if you think about it, is the greatest and perhaps most true critiscism possible of the Republican party.
 

---

Posted by Lalo (Member # 3772) on :
 
Scott, that's presuming the Republican party exercises fiscal responsibility. Which, for the past couple decades, it's expressly avoided.
 

---

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
 

quote:

---

Isn't the stance of these Republicans tantamount to putting money before love?

Which, if you think about it, is the greatest and perhaps most true critiscism possible of the Republican party.

---

quote:

---

Leto, I don't know what networks you're watching where this issue isn't being given much exposure. . . but there is quite a lot of it on Fox, CNN, MSNBC, and my local channels.

---

In newscasts. Have you ever looked at ratings for news casts? And considering how short news reports are, I find your "quite a lot" more than a little ridiculous.
 

---

Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
 
Leto, I don't make a habit of looking at the ratings, so no.

However, at my work we have one of the big three news networks on 24/7. Every hour, the given three (CNN, MSNBC, FOX) spent as much time on the issue of gay marriage as on the war, the economy, and other domestic issues. From my unscientific polling of these stations, I am convinced that the issue has been covered.

I'm not sure where your objection lies-- do you contend that these news stations have spent NO or very little time covering the same-sex marriage debate?

Or are you objecting just on basic principle?


 

---