More Family Values
How many prominent California Prop 8 supporters have been shown to be huge hypocrites? I’m losing count. There’s the state legislator who bragged about his lobbyist mistress, and Miss California’s sex tapes and now there’s this:
It’s no good for a family values Republican to get picked up on a DUI. But substantially worse to get picked up for a DUI after leaving a gay nightclub with an unidentified man in a state vehicle.
That’s the sorry state that befell California state Senator Roy Ashburn (R-Bakersfield) early Wednesday.
In better days Ashburn, a fierce opponent of gay rights, was fighting marriage equality and organizing anti-gay marriage rallies as part of his “Traditional Family Values” campaign.
But he hit a bump in the road — figuratively, not literally — Wednesday at around 2 AM when CHP officers observed him weaving and driving erratically in downtown Sacramento. After a field sobriety test, officers determined that Ashburn, who reeked of alcohol and had bloodshot, watery eyes, was under he influence of alcohol and placed him under arrest. He was released from jail just before 4 AM.
My cynicism once again is rewarded. The more someone talks about “family values” and “morals,” the more likely they are to be doing something wrong.
Tags: Family Values, Prop 8
The more someone talks about “family values” and “morals,” the more likely they are to be doing something wrong.
Ashburn divorced in 2003… so the only thing ‘wrong’ was the DUI.
Of course it is still fun to point and laugh at the hypocrisy of yet another closet case.
According to wikipedia:
On Saturdays from 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM Pacific, Ashburn hosts a political talk show on KERN 1410 AM.
Should be good listening this week.
Like I said, it just feeds my cynicism that people who oppose gay marriage seem to find it really tempting.
Oh yeah, the state car was ‘wrong’ too. I bet he was an anti-corruption crusader as well. Wring out all that fraud, waste, and abuse you know.
From Joe.My.G-D blog:
Anti-gay GOP California state Sen. Roy Ashburn was arrested for DUI yesterday after leaving Faces, a popular Sacramento gay bar, with an unidentified male passenger. Ashburn has been a loud opponent of LGBT rights and has organized and hosted anti-gay marriage rallies for the Traditional Values Coalition. He also has a 100% rating from the anti-gay Capitol Resource Family Impact group for voting against every LGBT rights bill during his tenure.
The California Highway Patrol pulled over Senator Roy Ashburn at 2:00 a.m. Wednesday after an officer noticed a black Chevy Tahoe swerving at 13th and L Streets. When the officer stopped the state-issued vehicle, the driver identified himself as Senator Ashburn. He was arrested without incident and charged with two misdemeanors: driving under the influence and driving with a blood alcohol level higher than .08% or higher. A male passenger, who was not identified as a lawmaker, was also in the car but was not detained. Ashburn was booked into the Sacramento County Jail and released on $1,400 bond. Ashburn, a father of four, is a Republican Senator representing parts of Kern, Tulare and San Bernardino Counties with a history of opposing gay rights. Ashburn issued a statement on the arrest Wednesday afternoon: “I am deeply sorry for my actions and offer no excuse for my poor judgment. I accept complete responsibility for my conduct and am prepared to accept the consequences for what I did. I am also truly sorry for the impact this incident will have on those who support and trust me – my family, my constituents, my friends, and my colleagues in the Senate.”
Ashburn is being term-limited out of office in 2010. In January he surprised supporters by announcing that he would not be running for the U.S. House or the powerful California State Tax Board, two jobs he’d publicly had his eye on for the last year. Ashburn divorced his wife in 2003.
ANTI-GAY VOTING RECORD: In March 2009, Sen. Ashburn voted against a Senate resolution declaring Proposition 8 unconstitutional. Ashburn voted three times to oppose the creation of Harvey Milk Day. In September he voted against California recognizing out of state same-sex marriages. In 2008 he voted to oppose an expansion of the state’s insurance laws to include sexual orientation as a protected class.
All I can say is Mwahhhhhhhh
Assuming he is gay for the sake of argument, it’s really tragic how many victims come from situations such as these.
First is his ex-wife, who may have for years lived in a loveless marriage. And may now question whether anything in their marriage was genuine (see: The former Mrs. Jim McGreevey).
then there’s the 4 kids who have to deal with the complex situations that can come with being a child of divorce.
Then there’s his passenger (assuming again for the sake of arguement he was there for a romantic rendez-vous). what if he suddenly becomes “identified”? and he gets splashed in a tabloid? or reporters show up at his house? maybe he didn’t know who his date was. Perhaps had the evening gone as planned, he would have been bullied to keep their night a secret?
and lastly there’s the gay people of California. Who dont have equality because some selfish asshole felt that the only way to deflect preceived negative attention off of himself was to punish the community he wanted to be a part of (and his identity protected by) in his free time. But maybe he’s a victim too, because the conservative movement made him so ashamed of himself that he felt he needed to behave this way.
Maybe if conservatives just relaxed, and let gay people be who they are. Life would be better.
Thank you, V. You hit it straight on (no pun intended).
Forget a big tent. The GOP has got to have the biggest walk-in closet in the world.
GOOD one anon!
Of course, that presumes that the only reason a man would be in a gay bar is because he is gay and looking for sex. Presumably you folks are honest enough to admit that this is not necessarily the case — especially if one actually has gay friends and is willing to associate with them in “gay” places.
My best friend is a gay man. There are several “gay” restaurants, bars, and clubs I have gone to with him in the course of our friendship — sometimes with my wife, sometimes without. Am I trolling for guys? Heck no — I’m hanging out with a friend and colleague who picks the venue for our outings sometimes.
Now I don’t know what the situation was here — whether he is a straight man who was in a gay place for innocent reasons, or whether he is a closeted gay man. But more to the point, I’m not prepared to presume hypocrisy on the basis of what we have here.
DUI in a state vehicle’s o.k. then RWR?
Didn’t say that at all — in fact, I didn’t address that. I was dealing with the presumption that seems at play here that the only reason he would be at a gay establishment would be that he is secretly gay.
You do have, and I don’t say this lightly, a good point, RWR. However, if we assume that he was there only with a gay friend and not because he himself is gay, I think that only drops him down one small rung on the Hypocrisy Ladder. Instead of having a strongly bigoted, anti-gay official who is secretly gay himself, we have one that has a very close gay friend. (I assume he’s close, or else why would someone with Ashburn’s history agree to go along to a gay bar?) I find it very odd that someone with a close gay friend would be so openly anti-gay. I mean, even Dick Cheney has the decency to see from personal experience that gay people are, in fact, people.
The only explanation I can come up with that makes him seem the least like a very large feminine hygeine product, is that he actually is NOT anti-gay, but only plays one for the voters. This only makes him a political hypocrite, and maybe not a moral one.
Either that, or he was doing “research”, a la Pete Townshend.
Wasn’t there a link here yesterday stating the unidentified passenger was Supreme Roberts? True or not.
Now I don’t know what the situation was here — whether he is a straight man who was in a gay place for innocent reasons, or whether he is a closeted gay man.
In his defense, he WAS drinking.
The problem is that opposing gay marriage does not make one anti-gay. I support the traditional definition of marriage — and so does my friend. I have strong moral qualms about gay sexual activity — but gladly socialize with my friend and whoever he is currently dating even though I presume that that they are sexually active (just as I do with straight couples of my acquaintance) — and gladly welcome my cousin and her partner (they did a civil union in New Hampshire when they became legal and are leaders of the gay marriage fight in their home state) into my home and am consider her partner to be a part of the family. But by the stunted definition of anti-gay that some of you want to apply, I fall into that category since I would have likely voted precisely the same way as Ashburn did on most of the votes MJ listed above.
Actually, yes it does. But we know already that you don’t believe in equal rights under the law for all human beings.
Got it, anonone — failure to kowtow before the liberal political ideology makes one a bigoted hatemonger.
And for what it is worth — I do believe in equal rights under the law for all. I just happen to disagree with you what those rights are and what their extent is.
RWR here’s where I get confused. I have no doubt you love your best friend and your cousin. But do you not feel they should get the same tax breaks that you do? the same health insurance benefits you’re entitled to? the ability to visit their loved one in the hospital and possibly make decisions regarding their care? Do you believe we should have civil unions to achieve this? If you don’t believe in civil unions then do you feel while it’s ok to be a friend to gay people you know and their partners that we should withold these things from them as some sort of civic punishment for their behavior which you have moral qualms about? This kind of strikes me as the “I’m not racist! I have black friends!” argument and I’d hate to reduce such a nuanced issue to that. A good deal of the gay community has discussed that the best way to advance gay rights is to be as open as possible, because when you know a gay person, it’s much harder to support discrimination against them. This seems to fly in the face of that, so how do you feel about it?
Also I’d hate to ask you to speak for your friend, but if you know why he opposes gay marriage as a gay man himself I’d LOVE to know.
Hey just kidding–there you are–the Roberts thing was a hoax–unfortunate, but point proven.
http://www.towleroad.com/2010/03/roy-ashburn-was-outed-by-gay-mayor-last-year.html
to add to the discussion, it seems this wasn’t a one time deal with Mr. Ashburn socializing with a gay friend. Seems he was fairly regular on the gay scene.
(site’s ads are not always SFW so be careful)
When Bush was Presidunce many repukes were outed? A Democrat in power and all their sordid fake family values come out. Why is it when a gay person is “pushed out of the closet” it becomes headlines. Is being gay and cheating on your wife/husband, any worse than a hetrosexual cheating on his spouse? Americans are so morbidly sexed crazed (about other peoples sexuality). We are ALL hypocrits.
Rhymey, “Just because I am against equal rights for [fill in the blank] doesn’t mean that I am anti-[[fill in the blank]” has always been the personal excuse and rationalization for prejudice and bigotry.
Try filling in the blanks and you’ll see what I mean:
Women
Blacks
Texans
By the way, equal rights in regards to marriage is that either all people’s marriages are recognized by the state or none of them are. Personally, I think the state should only recognize civil unions for all people.
V — I believe in some sort of civil union (though I don’t like that term, for reasons I’ll explain later) to take care of inheritance, property, and medical issues, among others. The exact parameters of the thing are something subject to legislative definition as they are adopted, but they would be substantially similar to marriage in most cases. In other words, where we differ is essentially (or at least primarily) terminology. But that said, i believe that such institutions must be created organically with the consent of the governed, not imposed by courts — for the same reason that I believe that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Roe v. Wade was a political disaster as well as constitutionally erroneous.
As for my friend’s position on gay marriage, it is quite similar to mine (we are both Midwestern military brats, about a year apart in age, and both social studies teachers, and have similar views in a lot of areas). Leave the term “marriage” for traditional male/female relationships and have another name for for the newly created institution, out of recognition for the historical differences between the two and out of respect for the sensitivity of the overwhelming majority of religious believers who see marriage as having religious significance and a traditional male/female structure.
Suffice it to say, anonone, that I believe government should be banned from discrimination against any individual for just about any reason. And I’m not going to get into the issue of so-called civil rights laws as they apply to private businesses and individuals, because the libertarian argument I make just causes too much hate and discontent around here when folks intentionally misconstrue it to battle a strawman of their own making.