I may agree with that sentiment, but, as I remember, the Log Cabin has endorsed and worked for many Republicans who can hardly even fathom the concept of gay rights – usually stating that “economic” or “international” or “defense” or “taxes” or some other right-wing litmus test trumped gay rights issues for Log Cabin members. They’ve even worked to defeat openly gay and key gay rights supporters because these elected officials did not toe their radical right agenda on non-gay issues. Huh?

Robert Turner wants to pick a fight within the LGBT community about whether the Victory Fund should make changes to its endorsement criteria. Presuming that there is an army of viable, out, anti-abortion, LGBT candidates waiting to burst onto the scene is just silly. I do applaud conservative LGBT people for coming out and stepping forward into the public square to join the debate. There have always been closeted conservatives just as there have been closeted people in every walk of life. It’s better to have everyone, particularly public officials and political candidates, be open about who they are. LGBT conservatives should keep speaking out and keep running for office. If and when their candidacies demonstrate viability they will find support. As more good candidates run viable campaigns they will gain traction and achieve success.

The Victory Fund’s endorsement of Dan Hill, who ran well (but lost), may prove that such candidates deserve a chance but doesn’t make the case for a sea change in Victory Fund policy. The steady, evolving, politically astute judgments of the Victory Fund should continue. I bet we’ll hear from them when it really is time to make a change.