Sure, the words on the tape “speak for themselves”. They reflect an apparently angry, confused, and inconsistent individual opinion–further garbled and questionable due to the circumstances of the recorder’s leading questions to an intoxicated volunteer who is NOT part of the Howell campaign.

My opinion is shaped by:
(1) years of observing Sen. Howell’s performance and positions on issues
(2) evaluation of her work, which, for the most part, aligns with my positions and priorities
(3) recognition of the many facets of the context in which she works in Richmond

Mr. Turner:
1. I agree with you 100% that “Homophobia is a bipartisan problem” and that “bigotry toward gay people is unacceptable”. It takes time.

2. I agree wholeheartedly with your position that gay activists and the media “should not stay silent” in the face of bigotry [and insult]. I will carry that a step further and assert that neither should a reasonable Virginia Democrat stay silent in the face of a Log Cabin leader apparently practicing “the politics of slander” against an honorable, effective, and NOT bigoted incumbent in the office that the candidate you support is challenging.

3. I have always respected the Log Cabin Republicans. Today, I’m questioning that because of the extremely strident accusative tone that you seem to take – but you are only one, and you are upset, so I should let it go. When people get upset they often carry things a bit far, like the individual who stated HER PERSONAL position and was also upset (and inebriated).

4. DO YOU KNOW JANET HOWELL? Probably not, since you don’t travel in Democratic circles and obviously no doubt have friends in the Virginia Governor’s office and current administration. You need to remember that some of those fellow-Republican folks are extremely zealous in their beliefs and have all kinds of agendas (including underlying convictions about homosexuals). It’s just the way humans are.

5. I KNOW SENATOR HOWELL, and have for years. I wrote a note outlining some of her attributes after the first commenter at the end of this article. PLEASE read those comments. Your accusations simply DO NOT FIT Janet Howell.

6. You claim that many folks and the WaPo are enabling bigotry by not jumping all over Senator Howell – for actions that I am highly skeptical that she committed.
Do you have further evidence than that reported in the Oct. 14 Blade?

Why are the entities you specified not screaming about the horrible totally unacceptable behavior of Janet Howell’s campaign? PERHAPS BECAUSE THEY KNOW HER — how deeply she cares about civil rights and how she has served well in the interests of ALL OF US, how she runs clean campaigns, and how she has struggled to ensure fairness to all in her Senate leadership roles–including championing issues of importance to the LGBTQ community. (IMHO it is an uphill battle in a sadly biased Commonwealth that is too entrenched in old ideas and long-outdated behaviors.)

7. You say “She has attempted a smear that affects not just Forrest but all gay men. Will she get away with it? Some people, but not enough, are criticizing Howell’s campaign.” You contend that Janet Howell is doing all these dastardly deeds – but it could be only the individual that Forrest’s campaign manager talked with (and secretly recorded) … and probably a few other individuals. You know darn well, if you do your homework, that Imarti is NOT part of the Howell campaign. Yet you smear Howell personally – does that represent the style of your candidate for Senate in district 32? I hope not because it is way too careless and crucifies all not entirely in tune with you.
Y’know, my grandmother taught me that one of the most important things to live by is the GOLDEN RULE. Perhaps you need to reflect on that instead of going into “auto-defensive mode” and jumping way ahead of the facts at hand. Humans have not progressed far beyond the tribal mentality in our religious, political, or community relationships. Sad. But I have hope that we can all do better.

8. Not incidentally, I want you to know that we have a gay son, a gay grandson, and many friends in “your” community. We know the extra burdens of just trying to be who you are. We also know that we are all in this life on this Earth together and need to stop abusing everyone and everything around us and learn to live in peace.
I hope you have read this far, if you are not so upset that you have no patience with another’s views.

If you are nearly as righteous as you feel you are, it might be good to acknowledge that you are shooting down the wrong person by attacking Janet Howell. SHE IS ON YOUR SIDE!

When my husband and I have time to collaborate later in the day, we may comment further to the Blade. I will be sure to send you a copy.
Ann H. Csonka, Herndon
(We were in Janet Howell’s District until redistricting changed that this election cycle)

Janet Howell talks with colleagues on both sides of the aisle, to get things done in the Senate. The earlier Blade article relates Sen. Obenshain’s recollection of a conversation with Sen. Howell; it is quite unlike the narrow reference by Barton. So what? They talk.

BTW, if Janet ticked off attributes to Obenshain, including a routine “partner” reference, so what? That could mean a gay or heterosexual partner, right? I.e., not single. My husband and I were partners for 16 years before we got married to appease some family members. Local papers even referred to us as partners sometimes. People tend to hear what fits their mindsets.

I have known Howell for over 20 years and she would never “promote homophobia” in her campaign– and would not permit others to do so. That is ridiculous. It simply is not part of her.
Senator Howell is fair, open-minded, and has championed a number of issues important to the LGBTQ community as well as serving admirably for the WHOLE community she represents.

Ann H. Csonka, Herndon