SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Gop Audience Boos Gay Veteran

THE PLANK NOVEMBER 28, 2007

Gop Audience Boos Gay Veteran

BY JAMES KIRCHICK

Towards the end of tonight's debate, a retired Army Brigadier General named Keith Kerr asked the candidates -- via, of course, a YouTube video -- about their thoughts on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Kerr revealed that he is himself gay, but came out after his 43 years in the military. Anderson Cooper posed the question directly to Mitt Romney, who, in his past life as a candidate who ran to the left of Ted Kennedy on gay rights, once said that he "look[ed] forward" to the day when gays could serve openly in the military. As is his wont, Romney sputtered and fumbled the question. 

Cooper asked Kerr -- who was in the audience -- if he got the answer he wanted, and, unsurprisingly, Kerr said no and began to explain why. As Jonathan Martin also reports, the audience then began to boo Kerr (there were a few, remote shushes). You would think that conservative journalists -- apoplectic at the "Betray Us" smear -- would be outraged at such foul treatment of our veterans, right?

Actually, National Review Online's Kathryn Jean-Lopez, the slavish Gold Star Super-Duper Trooper of the Mitt Romney Fan Club, points out that Kerr is an acknowledged supporter of Hillary Clinton and supported John Kerry in 2004 (K-Lo, it should be noted, once postulated that gay marriage in Massachusetts was responsible for an isolated case of bestiality). Kate O'Beirne also complains about "the gay questioner" whom CNN allowed to "filibuster." Okay. Perhaps CNN should have vetted him more and had him acknowledge these affiliations. But I don't see how that justifies the largely GOP audience shouting down a veteran with over 40 years of service to his country. 

We all know the GOP is the party for our soldiers. Except the gay ones.  

--James Kirchick 

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 24 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

24 comments

Nice post, James.  To the point.   And I agree- it was wierd to let him speak for so long, especially at a Republican debate (though I liked what he was saying, I think a lot of us would get upset if CNN let Grovr Norqust or someone grill the Dems)(Lord in somewhere, I am not equating the two).   But the boos made me sick.  When he was shown in the audience they applauded, but it was tepid and confused, as if one hand instinctively started to clap at the dinner-bell of the word soldier, while the other was reaching for a sanitizing napkin after seeing a Gay.

I know hands don't see.  Roll with me, Talkbackers.  

- boneill

November 29, 2007 at 12:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sick, just sick. You can't be a patriot if you don't suppress your sexuality.

And you get no leeway, boneill.

- rozenson

November 29, 2007 at 12:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How do you know he was booed because he is gay and not because the audience smelled a plant?

- nbarry

November 29, 2007 at 1:13am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Because Romney's bumbling response also drew boos.

- rozenson

November 29, 2007 at 1:20am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Right on James.  Great insight, great point...more like this...

- thejauntyboulevardier

November 29, 2007 at 9:50am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Boneill is right. He should have been (you'll pardon the pun) vetted better. If he's actually working on behalf of one of the campaigns -- be it Democrat or Republican -- that needed to be disclosed.

Still, the boos did make me sick, too. But then there wasn't much about last night's debate that wasn't wince-inducing.

- BHLnyc

November 29, 2007 at 9:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

First off, great post for Kirchick. This is good blogging, thoughtful and concise, with appropriate links. More like this, please.

Second, since when is it improper for an American citizen who happens to support the candidate of one party to pose a question to candidates of the other party? This isn't Yankees fans crashing a Red Sox party and shouting "Big Pappi Sucks!" This is a legitimate question on a matter of public importance being put before candidates for the nation's highest office by an American citizen.

Besides, even if he were a "Hillary plant," it would mark ethical progress for the Clinton campaign to be planting questions for other candidates instead of for Hillary.

- rhubarbs

November 29, 2007 at 10:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I kinda of think the Republican party has become a caricature of itself.

- adamvaught

November 29, 2007 at 10:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I again agree with rhubarb...

who said that the audience for these debates are confined to the party identification of the debaters?  I never assumed that.  I sensed that most in the audience would identify with the GOP but who said that ONLY Republicans could attend and no one who was a Democrat or supported a Democrat could attend or participate?  How is this a "plant"?  I would feel the same way if it were a Republican attending a Democratic debate.  Who made up these "rules"?  

and who would be shocked! shocked! if we found out that this guy was "planted"?  So what?  This is a freakin' debate supposedly with American voters, for American voters?  It did not say just for Republicans...

- thejauntyboulevardier

November 29, 2007 at 11:01am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Not a caricature, just more cognitive dissonance of the sort that's fracturing the GOP coalition. The GOP used to be the default choice for soldiers and businessmen, and in recent years has become the default choice for two-parent working families with school-age kids. Now they've royally pissed off many of our soldiers with their shabby treatment of them, Rummy's incompetence and a botched war: there's electoral opening #1 for Dems.

The GOP's insistence on forcing employers to take on the health insurance admin and cost burden can and should-- if our side ever gets wise on this-- infuriate any business owner or manager who wants to be competitive with foreign rivals, and of course it's a barrier to would-be entrepreneurs. That's opening #2 for us.

And tax breaks for yuppies instead of (people with) "puppies" ie school-age kids, plus the failure to shore up and defend pensions and acces to affordable health insurance for working families is of course the biggest opening of all for our side.

Assuming someone, anyone, on our side knows how to play this game, that is... (it ain't Edwards, alas)

- teplukhin2you

November 29, 2007 at 11:07am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This reminds me of that GOP debate (Allen vs Webb) when the audience found out that Allen was Jewish and then booed him.

- virginiacentrist

November 29, 2007 at 11:36am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, tep, when I was still serving we used to joke that we should all vote for the Dems.  They'd raise our pay and benefits, and never use us.  Sweet deal.

Seriously, what percentage of the military vote will go for the Dems next year?  I suspect it will be quite small, as it has been since the Vietnam era.  And we all know the many reasons why.

- butchie b

November 29, 2007 at 11:44am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Another insane, stomach churning Anti-Arab rant from Kirchick. Exactly, how Isra.........eh....I mean....sensible post Jamie. I think I need to sit down. I don't feel well.

- The Ignorant Populist

November 29, 2007 at 12:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Who cares if it was a plant?  That audience reaction was great information, it spoke for itself.  What a pathetic display the entire charade was, we were throwing things at the radio by th end of it.

Grand Old Party, huh?  How about Gargoyles On Parade? Gross Old Pigs?  

- Wandreycer1

November 29, 2007 at 12:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hee, hee.  I like Gargolyes On Parade.

- drdannyu

November 29, 2007 at 1:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I was expecting a bunch of those turning-radius Scott whats his name guys to show up on this thread, hollering about Hillary plants and liberal media conspiracies.  

- Wandreycer1

November 29, 2007 at 1:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

They are not allowed on the blog, Wandrey, so we have a little bit of breathing room.

I am glad he asked the question, and was able to say if it was answered or not.   That is good.  I hope I didn't imply otherwise.   I just wonder how we would feel if the tables were turned.

- boneill

November 29, 2007 at 1:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Again, I'm glad the question was asked. I just think it was irresponsible not to disclose his connection to a Democratic candidate.

- BHLnyc

November 29, 2007 at 2:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If a Smokin' Tom Tancredo planted some xenophobe in the audience to hector about Muslims and Mexicans?  Or a Ron Paul guy who pestered about the gold standard and the Tri-lateral commission? Maybe even a Romney guy asking about doubling Gitmo and ticking time bombs?  Huckabee's people asking for Bible quotes?  

Bring it on.  They are all so ridiculous (except McCain, a great man), it's hard to imagine how it could be anything but good for the Dems.

- Wandreycer1

November 29, 2007 at 2:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Look, I appreciate that Huckabee is a kindly fellow, that matters to me and I do like him immensely for it.  But I want him nowhere near the Presidency.

Thanks for the heads up Bone on our turning radius friends being iced out of the blog - I do kind of like those guys.

- Wandreycer1

November 29, 2007 at 2:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Remember back in 1988 when the Republicans figured out that they were making fools of themselves bashing on AIDS victims and they hurredly invited a patriotically correct white Mom suffering from AIDS to speak at their convention? So they'd appear, you know, compassionate?  After months and years of Fallwell and his ilk yammering about God's payback on Republican stages?  

Well, that's what I think might happen with all of this immigrant bashing.

I've already risked the contempt of my esteemed TNR brethen with my squishy-headedness on immigration, so why not up the ante? It's not going to change, especially after last night's pathetic display.

I bet by 2012, the Republicans will have a stage full of immigrants, legal or otherwise, after getting beat repeatedly from an energized latino wave.

- Wandreycer1

November 29, 2007 at 2:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Seems to me the hard-righties have demonstrated many times over they'll turn on any soldier who in any way questions or criticizes conservative doctrine, gay-related or not.  Why would this particular reaction be any surprise?

- cspencef

November 29, 2007 at 3:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Honestly, I wasn't surprised they didn't like him, it is how openly hostile and- even weirder- impolite to a man, a soldier, right there.   I don't know.  I expected some more decorum, even from hypocritical assholes.

- boneill

November 29, 2007 at 3:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

bone,

I did not watch the debate - as you know - but I have viewed several clips today, as many as I can access on my computer.  What has struck me about the GOP debates, especially as they scan the audience, is how incredibly white and 60ish the audience is. One could say, based upon this small sample, that the GOP is made up almost entirely of older white, somewhat grim looking people.  This aspect of the political divide is almost NEVER discussed.  And if you have seen those graphs showing the demographics of the various candidates - check TAPPED and Matt Y's blog - you will seen that the people working for the GOP are almost entirely white.  

If this is the case, how come no one ever writes about this obvious difference between the parties?  Now, of course the GOP has non white registers but looking at Rudy's staff, or a McCain rally, or last night's GOP debate, one would never guess it...

- thejauntyboulevardier

November 29, 2007 at 4:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close