Connect with us

National

Paul latest to surge as Iowa caucuses approach

Romney, Gingrich remain at top of national polls

Published

on

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul (photo via wikimedia by R. DeYoung)

The GOP presidential race continues to twist and turn two weeks before the Iowa caucuses as libertarian Rep. Ron Paul surges and hopes to win the first in the series of contests that will determine who will take on President Obama in 2012.

Paul, who’s represented Texas in the U.S. House since 1997, has risen to the top of the pack in the most recent polls asking Iowa Republicans which candidate they prefer as the caucuses approach on Jan. 3.

According to an InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Research poll published Sunday, Paul has support from 23.9 percent among Iowa Republicans who say they’ll vote in the caucuses. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney comes in second with support from 18.2 percent, followed by Texas Gov. Rick Perry at 15.5 percent and former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich at 12.9 percent.

A victory for Paul in Iowa could complicate matters for other Republican presidential candidates who are enjoying support nationwide. According to a national CNN/ORC International poll published on Monday, Romney and Gingrich are tied for the lead at 28 percent, while Paul comes in third at 14 percent.

Paul’s record is distinctive among other Republicans in the race as being more pro-LGBT than others.

The lawmaker voted on two separate occasions in 2004 and 2006 against a Federal Marriage Amendment that would have banned same-sex marriage throughout the country. Paul was among the five Republicans who voted for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal on the House floor in May even before the Pentagon released its report in November 2010.

Paul has also been unique among his fellow GOP candidates on the issue of same-sex marriage by saying the federal government should get out of the business of regulating marriage — in keeping with his libertarian views. He is one of a few who hasn’t signed the National Organization for Marriage’s pledge to oppose same-sex marriage as president — much to the consternation of the organization.

According to the Boston Globe, Paul articulated his thoughts on marriage on Wednesday while speaking to students at Straight A Academy, a small non-traditional private school in Manchester, N.H., in response to a question from the audience.

“Why should the government be telling you what marriage is all about?” Paul was quoted as saying. “You might have one definition. I have another definition.”

Paul reportedly said he personally believes marriage is between one man and one woman, but said regulations involving marriage should be up to the states. He then advocated creating a secular agreement for relationship recognition in which, “you can go to court to resolve the differences and the arguments over it.” A Paul spokesperson later clarified no federal benefits would be conferred as a result of these contracts such as tax benefits.

But Paul has expressed support for the Defense of Marriage Act and has been been critical of the Obama administration’s decision to no longer defend the anti-gay law in court. Paul issued a statement condemning the announcement when it was made in February.

“Today’s announcement that the Obama administration will abandon its obligation to enforce DOMA is truly disappointing and shows a profound lack of respect for the Constitution and the Rule of Law,” Paul said in a statement at the time.

The lawmaker has also voted against hate crimes protections legislation. Paul didn’t vote on a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act when it came to the House floor in 2007.

R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, said Paul’s positions on LGBT issues are “founded on his perspective of states’ rights.”

“For him, it’s more of the principle that people should be able to live their lives as they choose without the government impeding on that,” Cooper said.

But Jerame Davis, interim executive director of the National Stonewall Democrats, said Paul’s “constant refrain of states rights” is what is most troubling about his candidacy.

“States don’t have rights in and of themselves — they are just another division of government that derives their power from the people,” Davis said. “The states rights argument has been used to perpetrate some of the worst aspects of American history. It scares the hell out of me to hear someone running for president use this refrain, especially when you consider Ron Paul’s opposition to the Civil Rights Act was based, at least partially, on this notion.”

Anti-gay Iowa leader endorses Santorum

In related news, a leading anti-gay activist in Iowa threw his support behind Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum in an endorsement on Tuesday — a decision that may give the trailing candidate a boost in the polls.

Bob Vander Plaats, CEO of FAMiLY LEADER, said during a news conference that Santorum could be “the Huckabee in this race,” referring to the former Arkansas governor and social conservative favorite Mike Huckabee who won the Iowa caucuses in 2008.

“I saw him as a champion for the family in the U.S. House, I saw him as a champion for the family in the U.S. Senate. I saw him as a champion for the family on the campaign trail,” Vander Plaats said. “So today, I, as an individual, am going to endorse Rick Santorum. I’m going to mobilize whatever resources that I have at my disposal to advocate for him.”

Vander Plaats, who ran unsuccessfully for Iowa governor in 2010, has been working against marriage rights for same-sex couples in Iowa since the State Supreme Court ruled in favor of such rights in 2009. The activist led the successful effort to unseat three justices who ruled in favor of marriage equality during a 2010 referendum.

Chuck Hurley, who heads the FAMiLY LEADER’s Iowa Family Policy Center, also endorsed Santorum. These endorsements are personal and not on behalf of FAMiLY LEADER, they both have said. During the news conference, Vander Plaats said the board “reached unanimity” that the organization wouldn’t endorse any particular candidate during the Iowa caucuses.

Troy Price, executive director of the pro-LGBT group One Iowa, said Vander Plaats’ endorsement of Santorum “comes as no surprise” and demonstrates he’s “out of touch” with what voters want.

“Both Santorum and Vander Plaats have built their careers attacking loving and committed gay and lesbian couples, and the fact is that Vander Plaats caved to the extreme social conservative agenda,” Price said. “With poll numbers lagging, it is clear Rick Santorum does not have a chance against President Obama in November, and Vander Plaats has endorsed a losing candidate.”

Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

According to the Des Moines Register, Santorum was eating a cinnamon roll in Pella, Iowa after a campaign stop when he found out about Vander Plaats’ and Hurley’s endorsement.

“There’s a lot of good people out here running, and I’m sure it was a tough decision. I think it shows that we’re the candidate right now that has the momentum, that has the message that’s resonating to the people of Iowa,” Santorum said.

Santorum has had a long history of anti-gay views and positions, even during the course of his time representing Pennsylvania in the Senate from 1995 to 2006. Santorum was one of the architects of the Federal Marriage Amendment. In an interview with the Associated Press, Santorum made notorious comments equating homosexuality to bestiality and pedophilia.

“In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality,” Santorum was quoted as saying. “That’s not to pick on homosexuality. It’s not, you know, man on child, man on dog, or whatever the case may be. It is one thing. And when you destroy that you have a dramatic impact on the quality.”

Following the remarks, Dan Savage, a Seattle-based gay activist, launched an effort to coin the word “santorum” as a sexual neologism. That definition remains the No. 1 result of “santorum” when the word in entered into Google.

Over the course of his campaign, Santorum has been emphasizing anti-gay views and his opposition to same-sex marriage perhaps more than any other presidential candidate. In addition to pledging to reinstate “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” Santorum said “our country will fail” as a result of same-sex marriage. He also raised eyebrows in August when he said same-sex marriage is like “saying this glass of water is a glass of beer.”

Santorum is also among the candidates who has signed a pledge from the National Organization for Marriage committing himself to, among other things, backing the Federal Marriage Amendment and defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court.

Despite Vander Plaat’s endorsement, Santorum trails the other candidates. The CNN/ORC International poll revealed Santorum has support from just 4 percent of Republicans nationwide. The candidate is one of only a few candidates in the Republican field who hasn’t experienced a surge sometime over the course of his campaign.

The polling results are similar in Iowa, despite the strong presence of evangelical voters in the state. The InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion Research found that Santorum has support from just 3.8 percent of registered Republicans who are set to vote in the caucuses.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

National

White House orders warning signs at Smithsonian over gender identity exhibits

Administration criticizes National Museum of American History

Published

on

Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum is expected to install warning signs outside the National Museum of American History warning visitors of supposedly anti-American content. (Photo courtesy of the Office of the Governor of North Dakota)

The Trump administration will install temporary warning signs outside the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History after releasing a report accusing the museum of promoting what it calls “radical” gender ideology and other politically biased content.

According to the Executive Order, “For purposes of policy formulation under EO 14253, this review of the National Museum of American History concludes that NMAH, by the intention and at the direction of current Museum and Smithsonian leadership, has become subject to institutional capture by a radical, activist ideology that is fundamentally opposed to telling the noble, honest story of the great country we know and love.”

Executive Order 14253 refers to what the White House has deemed the “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” order. Therefore, the Trump administration has said it will take all available steps to ensure that the issues in the report are addressed and rectified.

Without specifying, the White House has stated that warnings will be posted along NMAH to alert visitors to sections of the museum it has deemed are in violation according to the report.

“The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National Park Service (NPS) and in coordination with the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, shall install temporary signage along the NPS-maintained sidewalks and walkways used by the public to access the Museum, informing visitors of the findings of the Report and of the policy set forth in section 1 of this order,” the Executive Order states.

The warnings were raised in a 162-page report issued by the Domestic Policy Council. The report detailed ways in which the National Museum of American History (NMAH) has “poorly” portrayed American history and insufficiently highlighted the founding story during America 250th celebrations.

The report outlined key findings of the NMAH. One of these findings was the Center for Restorative History within the museum, which has stated its purpose is to “encourage systemic change” by highlighting diverse groups. However, the report states that it highlights every group of Americans except for straight and white Americans.

The Domestic Policy Council accused the museum of engaging in “transgender activism.” According to the report, examples include referring to “biological men” as women or girls, displaying what it describes as sexually suggestive content, and incorporating discussions of gender fluidity, gender identity, and gender nonconformity into the museum’s educational curriculum, “Becoming US.”

The report also criticizes the curriculum for using the term “transgender” when discussing gender-nonconforming people and encouraging individuals to ask a person’s pronouns when meeting them. It further objects to exhibits stating that “transgender, nonbinary, and cisgender female athletes” continue to struggle for and demand equality.

It also condemns what it refers to as explicit content in an exhibition, “Girlhood (It’s Complicated)”, such as chest binders, questioning gender testing in women’s sports, and referring to biological females as “people inhabiting female bodies.”

Additionally, the report accuses the museum of no longer participating in flag-celebrating ceremonies because it was “too busy” preparing for June Pride and WorldPride events. It states, “As Director Hartig explained in a June 2024 presentation, all her attention was focused on flying the Smithsonian Pride Alliance’s ‘intersexual pride flag during June’ in 2023 and 2024.”

On July 9, the American Historical Association issued a statement rejecting the report’s findings.

In regard to the report, it states, “Its anonymous authors overlook a central lesson of the nation’s founding: the United States was forged by finding common purpose amid intense divisions, conflicts, and disagreements.” They argue that only “honest history” can tell the true history of the nation.

House Republicans led a subcommittee hearing that questioned Smithsonian Director Hartig extensively. A main focus of the questions was on the exhibits related to gender identity and whether they were appropriate. In the hearing, Rep. Nancy Mace asked: “When was your gender revealed to you, Dr. Hartig?”

In response to questioning, Hartig stated that the institution is nonpartisan and does not push a specific agenda.

Hartig published a two-page statement ahead of her hearing outlining her thoughts on the situation. In the report, she states that the institution is always open to criticism and will continue to look for ways to improve, but she sees the report as misleading.

“I can attest that the report does not fairly characterize the full body of work at this museum. I am familiar with the depth and breadth of our collections, exhibits, and programming. And while I recognize there is always room for improvement, I also know the beauty, inspiration, and expertise that exists in our museum,” Hartig wrote.

Democrats created their own 16-page report as a rebuttal to the Domestic Policy Council’s report. It argued that the attacks by the current Trump administration are another example of its attempt to rewrite history. Additionally, the report states that no policy changes were included in the Executive Order, as that is beyond the President’s role. “The Report recommends nothing. That is no accident. To recommend an action, the Report would need to identify who is legally empowered to take it, and its own opening chapter concedes the President’s only power is to ‘urge’,” House Democrats wrote.

It is still unclear when the temporary warnings will be installed or what form they will take beyond the requirements outlined in the executive order.

An exhibit at the Smithsonian. (Washington Blade photo by Landon Shackelford)

Continue Reading

National

Trump ends direct HIV prevention funding to community groups

Advocates say transfer of funds to states may disrupt local programs

Published

on

The Trump administration will discontinue direct federal funding of community-based organizations that provide HIV prevention services. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

A decision by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) at the request of the Trump administration to discontinue direct federal funding of community-based organizations and clinics that provide HIV prevention services has raised concern among community health advocates, including LGBTQ advocates.

 News surfaced earlier this month that the OMB informed the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that it would not renew $46 million in funding for 96 community-based organizations that provide HIV testing, referrals to medical care, and arrangements for obtaining pre-exposure HIV prevention medication known as PrEP that has been shown to be 99 percent effective in preventing HIV infection.

Under the new policy arranged by OMB, the funds will be redirected to the states to be allocated to state and local health departments. The policy calls for states to encourage but not require their respective state and local health departments to allocate some of those funds for community-based organizations. Under the new policy, the funding is scheduled to last until May of 2027, before a renewal decision is made.

Some political observers have speculated that the decision to end direct federal funding to community-based organizations could be motivated by the Trump administration’s hostility to diversity, equity, and inclusion or DEI programs and organizations that promote those programs, with the belief that some of the groups receiving the federal HIV prevention funds are promoting DEI.

Carl Schmid, executive director of the D.C.-based HIV+ Hepatitis Policy Institute, is among the leaders of many AIDS advocacy organizations expressing strong opposition to the OMB action. Schmid said that in places like D.C. and some states, local officials will be willing to redirect the federal funds to local community-based organizations.

A list of the 96 community-based organizations across the country that are currently receiving the federal AIDS funds includes the D.C.-based Whitman-Walker Health, which has a long history of healthcare support for the LGBTQ community, and La Clinica del Pueblo, which reaches out to the Latino community.

 Schmid said Whitman-Walker and La Clinica del Pueblo have longstanding good relationships with the local D.C. government.

“But other states and jurisdictions don’t have that relationship with the community-based organizations,” Schmid said. “It depends on the state,” he said, adding, “Not all states send their money to the communities that really need it most. And not all states are fast in getting money to the community-based organizations.” 

Spokespersons for Whitman-Walker and La Clinica del Pueblo couldn’t immediately be reached for comment on whether they think the Trump administration’s latest action related to funding will adversely impact their respective organizations.  

 Schmid said under the current federal grant program slated to be discontinued, which has been in effect for at least five years, HIV-related health organizations receiving the federal grant funds were eligible for an existing federal policy enabling them to purchase HIV-related medication, including the PrEP prevention medication, at a significant discount from pharmaceutical companies. With the ending of the direct federal HIV funds to community-based organizations, Schmid said it was unclear whether problems may surface in obtaining drug discounts.

“They could still qualify as a sub-grantee from a state,”  Schmid said. “But what if they don’t get that grant again? They would not be able to qualify to obtain the drugs” at the discounted price, he said.

Among the organizations expressing strong concern over the decision to discontinue the direct HIV prevention funding to community-based organizations has been the Federal AIDS Policy Institute and its subgroup called the HIV Prevention Action Coalition.

In a July 22 letter bearing the names of 71 community-based organizations from throughout the country sent to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Acting Director Jay Bhattacharya, the group called for the Trump administration to “reconsider” ending the current funding policy.  

 “Ending this program without a clear plan for what comes next would dismantle prevention infrastructure that has taken more than three decades of federal investment to build and do so just as that long record of measurable returns is accelerating,” the letter states.

It says the initiative by President Trump in his first term as president to end the HIV epidemic and reduce new HIV infections by 90 percent by 2030 was moving ahead by the funding program for community-based organizations that the administration now wants to end. 

“Discontinuing this program would also cost far more than it saves,” the letter says. “Every HIV transmission prevented avoids an estimated lifetime treatment cost of roughly half a million dollars per person to the healthcare system – costs that fall heavily on taxpayer-funded programs, including Medicaid, Medicare, and the Ryan White HIV/AIDS program,” the letter continues.

“The choice before the administration is straightforward: a modest, targeted investment in prevention now, or far greater public expense for treatment later,” the letter concludes. 

Spokespersons for the OMB and the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the CDC, have not immediately responded to news media requests for comment on the opposition to the funding change policy.

Continue Reading

National

At Alliance Defending Freedom’s summit, church and state are one

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) among speakers

Published

on

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Uncloseted Media published this article on July 23.

By SPENCER MACNAUGHTON | Earlier this month, hundreds of people filled a conference room in San Diego. These included Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, Assistant Secretary of Health Admiral Brian Christine, OpenAI executive Dean Ball, and the attorneys general of West Virginia and Idaho.

They all came together for Alliance Defending Freedom’s 2026 Summit. The Christian legal group, also a Southern Poverty Law Center-designated anti-LGBTQ hate group, described the event as a “gathering of leaders from many different spheres, including law, public policy, media, business, education, and Christian leadership.”

Johnson — who has said that “homosexual relationships are inherently unnatural and … society cannot give its stamp of approval to such a dangerous lifestyle” — was a featured speaker.

In his speech, he seemed unconcerned with the separation of church and state: “It is so encouraging to Kelly and I to be among friends and fellow warriors for this cause and people who understand that God is not done with America yet. … ADF’s on the very tip of the spear, front line, defending those very truths and keeping the door open for the spread of the Gospel. This is our moment. I’m telling you, I believe the next season … is going to be the greatest season of this ministry since its inception.”

That ministry is one that has espoused aggressively anti-LGBTQ views since its inception in the early 1990s. It was co-founded by a group of evangelical men, including Alan Sears, who co-authored a book called “The Homosexual Agenda: Exposing the Principal Threat to Religious Freedom Today.” Since then, ADF has opposed gay marriage and supported bans on gay sex and on gender-affirming care for minors.

After helping overturn Roe v. Wade, ADF lawyers have led key victories at the Supreme Court. In 303 Creative v. Elenis, SCOTUS ruled that a website designer could refuse service to gay weddings. And this year they convinced the Court to overturn Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy and to uphold state laws in West Virginia and Idaho that ban trans girls from playing on girls’ sports teams.

At the summit, ADF President Kristen Waggoner, who has promoted conversion therapists and consistently misgenders trans people, interviewed these states’ attorneys general.

“The lawyers who were defending women’s sports were among the best I’ve ever seen in my entire life,” West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey told Waggoner.

Similar to Johnson, Trump’s Assistant Secretary of Health Christine showed his commitment to governing based on conservative Christianity. He gave a Bible-thumping speech against gender transition and trans healthcare, saying that it “contradicts … the deeper moral order that is woven into creation itself. For Genesis 1:27 informs us that God created man in his own image. … Male and female” He also said the “complementary relationship between man and woman is divine” and advocated for youth with gender dysphoria to receive care from a pastor.

All of these remarks from politicians made me think of the interview I published earlier this week with Pete Hegseth’s pastor, Doug Wilson. He wants a Christian theocracy in America and told me that: both the perpetrator and the victim should be disciplined in some cases of marital rape; that transgender people are “sad;” that execution is justifiable for certain homosexual acts; and that gay sex should be illegal.

The ADF Summit is glossy and polished. And while its messaging may be less explicit than Pastor Wilson’s, the track record of the organizations shows they have the exact same desires. They’re just deeply strategic in what they say and when and how they say it.

I believe the political power players who attended this year’s summit know this. They know they are endorsing an organization whose members have essentially called for the illegalization of most — if not all ‚ forms of queer behavior and presentation.

In the last few years, these perspectives have become increasingly embedded in the highest rooms of the federal government and they have been effective in stripping away LGBTQ rights. Wilson, who just installed a full-time pastor in Washington to lead services, says there are 10 to 20 government officials who align with his church’s ideology.

It is vital for Americans to keep their eyes wide open to the ultimate goal of groups like ADF: to create a United States that leaves LGBTQ people without rights and that pushes us back in the closet.

Continue Reading

Popular