After reading about the story of gaypatriot being driven out of the blog buisness i got turned onto the In/Out story of RNC leade Ken Mehlman
In other Mehlman news, RawStory.com has published a “response” by editor John Byrne to my blog posting that took issue with “anonymous sources” who claim I “spiked” a Blade story that would out Mehlman. Byrne now claims that RawStory did not report, and does not believe, that I “spiked” the story, even though ConspiracyPlanet.com published the RawStory piece with a headline saying exactly that. Instead, I “thwarted” or “stifled” the story by hiding information from my own reporters. I’ll leave the difference to semanticists, but the claim is rubbish however it is worded.
More interestingly, Byrne trots out as proof of a pattern in this regard that I declined an offer to investigate alleged audiotapes of a profile recorded by Congressman Ed Schrock on a phone sex line. RawStory suggests that I hid this offer from the Blade staff, as well. His only source for that claim is a former staffer who he knows was not even working at the Blade the time the offer was made. The irony here is that Byrne only knows that the Blade was offered the Schrock tapes because I told him, a fact he conveniently fails to report. Does he think I keep secrets from my staff and then blab to RawStory.com? The same goes for my own personal history with Ken Mehlman. RawStory reported the ties as if they were some secret revelations to be exposed, never informing readers that I wrote a very public editorial with the exact same information almost five months earlier.
Silly conspiracy theories aside, this is really just about a difference of opinion about how much of a public figure’s private sex life is fair game to investigate if he has an anti-gay record. RawStory made its view clear when it hired Mike Rogers, who initiated the campaign outing Capitol Hill staffers, to be “editor” of RawStoryQ, the site’s gay section.
As the Blade reported last August, those on Capitol Hill in Rogers’ crosshairs say they and their offices were subjected to as many as 20 phone calls a day, badgering office staff with details about closeted gays working there. Blade staffers are no strangers to these multiple, harassing phone calls. That’s certainly not journalism, and it’s not even activism. It’s borderline stalking; and it ought to stop.
but Chris went farther in demonstrating journalistic ethics and integrity
We believed in a government that should stay out of our pocketbooks and out of our bedrooms. George W. Bush has certainly steered clear of our wallets — enacting tax cut after tax cut — but he has failed to curb pork barrel spending and even created giant new entitlements. The combination has converted a record surplus into a record deficit and dug the government’s grubby hands into the pocketbooks of generations to come.
Even more fundamentally, the Bush campaign under the strategic direction of Rove and Mehlman used divisive social issues — including gay marriage — to drive deep cultural wedges, just to turn out the evangelical vote.
These GOP “values voters” do not believe in a limited government, at least when it comes to taking sides in the culture wars. They expect the government to impose their particular theological views on the country — and in so doing deprive a minority group the basic equality guaranteed by the Constitution and the freedom promised by the Declaration of Independence.
KEN WOULD PROBABLY respond that the president didn’t pick gay marriage as an issue; that “activist judges” imposed their own cultural values on Massachusetts by requiring the state to issue marriage licenses to gay couples.
But marriage is a peculiar institution, in which the government has chosen to create a bundle of protections and benefits for the committed adult couples who form the core of the American family.
Having created the institution, a limited government that respects the First Amendment prohibition on establishing a state religion cannot listen to one particular theological dogma in deciding which couples will qualify — whether or not that dogma belongs to a vital party constituency or even a majority.
Ken Mehlman should understand that, whether or not he is gay
While i may not agree with him on the Gay Marriage issue this is exactlly what an Issue advocating editorial should do.
It’s good Journalism and it is ethical Journalism
it doesn’t matter if Mehlman is gay, what matters is how does he hold to the gay rights/civil rights views of his past in his new position of power