Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Foley's Fall Spotlights Growing 'Velvet Mafia' Influence in GOP
Agape Press ^ | 10/9/6 | Fred Jackson and Bill Fancher

Posted on 10/10/2006 7:34:47 AM PDT by ZGuy

Amid the fallout of the Mark Foley scandal, one consequence appears to be an increasing exposure of the influential role homosexuals have within the Republican party. As the New York Times reported Sunday, homosexuals in the Republican Party -- sometimes known by insider slang terms including the "velvet mafia" or the "pink elephants" -- are a well-established force in the GOP.

According to the Times, many of these homosexual Republicans "have held crucial staff positions for decades," and this has been even more the case in recent years. "They have played decisive roles in passing legislation, running campaigns and advancing careers," the article notes.

And although "gay" GOP members have had to be, in most cases, more discreet about their lifestyle than their counterparts in the Democratic Party, the Mark Foley scandal -- and the recent confirmation of the Florida congressman's homosexuality -- has put a new spotlight on just what influence these homosexuals have within the Republican Party.

As the Times observes, conservative blogs and websites have stated that homosexual staff members played principle roles in investigating the Foley case, suggesting that the party has been betrayed by homosexual men trying to hide misconduct by one of their own.

The newspaper also says a group of homosexual activists has started a document known as "the list," a roster of homosexual congressional staff members and their Republican bosses. The list, the Times suggests, is an apparent attempt to force homosexual Republicans working in and around the Capitol to be more open about their lifestyle choice.

Meanwhile, one pro-family activist is calling for more openness about another aspect of the scandal. Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth believes the media have taken great pains to avoid using the words "homosexual" or "gay" in coverage of the Foley scandal. "There's clearly an effort here to make this somehow a pedophile issue or something that's separate from the homosexual issue," he asserts, "and, of course, this is right up the homosexual alley."

There is a well-documented history of homosexual men pursuing underage boys, LaBarbera says; but homosexual activists are getting help in burying this fact. "What we're seeing here," he contends, "is another effort by the media, working with the gay lobby, to separate out Foley's predations on a teenage boy from the homosexual issue."

The media is not being intellectually honest about the Foley situation or the pattern that it illustrates, the pro-family activist insists. "There's a long history of homosexuals being predators on teenage boys," he says.

"The fact is, if you go all the way back to the days of ancient Greece, there were homosexual relationships between adult men and teenage boys; so it's really ridiculous to say this has nothing to do with homosexuality," LaBarbera notes. He says the media's reporting of the Foley scandal has been marked by a great deal of political correctness, while the media have actually helped homosexual activists bury the truth.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: foley; homosexualagenda; velvetmafia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last
To: bluebunny
I have been saying all along that the real scandal here is that it has revealed what is pretty ordinary behavior among homosexuals, but the media is completely shutting up about it. If you walk around any neighborhood where lots of homosexuals live, or go into the chat rooms or bars or parties they frequent, you will see many older man/younger man couples and discussions. Youth is prized among homosexual men, and older ones are always trying to recapture their youth by proving they are still attractive to the young hot guys. They do not consider such behavior perverted or predatory at all. It is perfectly normal.

The fact that so many Americans are repulsed by Mark Foley's ordinary homosexual behavior should be a clue to the pro-homo media and those in both political parties who think these folks are just like the rest of us. They aren't.

21 posted on 10/10/2006 8:14:37 AM PDT by Dems_R_Losers (Vote as if your life depends on it -- because it does!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy
"There is a well-documented history of homosexual men pursuing underage boys, LaBarbera says; but homosexual activists are getting help in burying this fact."

They are getting help from the news media which is riddled with gays. An article in the New Yorker magazine last year lauded New York Times publisher "Pinch" Sulzberger for creating the "most gay-friendly" newsroom in the industry.
22 posted on 10/10/2006 8:17:26 AM PDT by Brad from Tennessee (Anything a politician gives you he has first stolen from you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yellowdoghunter
There more I hear about this, the less I like Republicans. I would expect homo's to be running the show if Demo's were in charge, but not Rep's....but that is apparently what is happening. I know it is turning off a lot of social conservative

Well, I'm a social conservative. But I have no problem with homosexuals who share my agenda being in a coalition with me and exercising political power.

Of course, R homosexuals do or could cause the following problems for the Republican party:

1. I don't believe homosexuals, as homosexuals, should be held up as role models in public. It's the wrong message to children. As long as R homosexuals are discreet about their problem, that doesn't occur. There is, however, the danger that they will eventually be used to legitimate the practice of homosexuality because they are respected and powerful Republicans.

2. Because most R homosexuals in power are, to some extent, closeted, they are very vulnerable to blackmail. We see some of that happening now.

3. In today's charged climate, I suspect there is a strong possibility of hidden agendas where congressional staffers could have a lot of power.

4. Reactions like yours. The party isn't a church. So there is no requirement, ala Paul, to temporarily exclude sinners from the party until they change their ways. But the secular humanists will and have used this as a wedge, depending on Christian conservatives to act like ninnys and commit political suicide. Of course, the remedy for that is easy. Don't act like ninnys.

There's a lot of better reasons to be annoyed at the R's than a bunch of homosexual staffers.

Political coalitions are often messy and throw unlikely bedfellows together (bad image there). We need every conservative vote and contributor. I'm not willing to run homosexuals out of the party. Besides, if we ran all the sinners out of the party, who would be left?

23 posted on 10/10/2006 8:19:19 AM PDT by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy
Being an active homo should absolutely disqualify you from holding any major office or position of authority in the GOP.

The Catholic Church in the US didn't learn that lesson in the 1950s-1980s and we are still sufferring for it to this day.
24 posted on 10/10/2006 8:19:25 AM PDT by Antoninus (Ruin a Democrat's day...help re-elect Rick Santorum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ModelBreaker

Darn, there you go ruining a perfectly good thread by making a sincere thoughtful commentary, that isn't knee-jerk ideological or dogmatic, about a complex problem . I suppose you don't let the middle schoolers put the grain alcohol in the punch as well...what a spoil sport.


25 posted on 10/10/2006 8:29:09 AM PDT by KC Burke (Men of intemperate minds can never be free...their passions forge their fetters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: jla

Can you please explain what you mean? They are not standing up to the smear from the Dems or they are not standing up to the smear from "gays". Or??


26 posted on 10/10/2006 8:31:31 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jla

Its time to clean house. The Republicans wanted a "big tent"; well, they got it. Its time to shrink the tent or they will lose from here on out.


27 posted on 10/10/2006 8:33:15 AM PDT by bella1 (Support the Minuteman Project.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Being an active homo should absolutely disqualify you from holding any major office or position of authority in the GOP.

Exactly. The GOP better start understanding that fact. Also, I just ignore those who will make ANY excuse for a Republican, no matter what they do.

28 posted on 10/10/2006 8:34:54 AM PDT by yellowdoghunter (Vote out the RINO's. Volunteer to help get Conservatives elected!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: traditional1

"So long as the PC-crap continues, afraid of offending the faggots and dykes is ruining the Republican Party, simply through the fear of Judicial Activist judges ruling in favor of the deviates as a 14th Amendment contortion."

And this idea of yours is represented by a predonderance of GOP majorities, at the national and state levels, for legislative and Constitutional measures to preserve the traditional views of marriage??? Not. Including the votes of GOP state and national representatives and Senators, some of whose staffs might include a "homosexual"?? Not.

I think that there is not a legislative history in GOP majorities that agrees with your idea.


29 posted on 10/10/2006 8:37:04 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Disambiguator

I was thinking the same thing, but decided not to say anything. Thanks for saying it for me. LOL.


30 posted on 10/10/2006 8:43:56 AM PDT by Not just another dumb blonde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy

bump


31 posted on 10/10/2006 8:44:49 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ozone34

First, one must assume that if such a mafia exists, there is some evidence that it has achieved some result, in an affect on policies and legislative agendas that it might be seeking.

Second, there is no evidence that such a "mafia" has impacted GOP legislative agendas, at the state or national level, in a way one would assume such a "mafia" would try to do.

As far as the term "lavender mafia" goes, I have only known it to be used and expressed among liberals when speaking of gay activists among the staffs of elected Democrats; and surely there are plenty of examples of Democrat legislative agendas that one could presume might have been pushed by said "mafia".

So, I would have to conclude that this entire tale orginates, as the orgininal "outing" of Foley does, somewhere with those who find some perverse political benefit from suppressing the "social conservative" vote for GOP members in November.

Nice try, but it won't work here.


32 posted on 10/10/2006 8:45:26 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy

Another RAT ploy to upset "easily-led fundamentalists" by telling them their GOP leadership loves gays.


33 posted on 10/10/2006 8:46:55 AM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dems_R_Losers

True... heterosexuals never do perverted things like trading in older first wives for hot, younger models..... ;)


34 posted on 10/10/2006 8:50:41 AM PDT by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Wuli

"As far as the term "lavender mafia" goes, I have only known it to be used and expressed among liberals when speaking of gay activists among the staffs of elected Democrats"

I used "Lavender Mafia" in the sense that it is commonly used to refer to the homosexual network active within the Roman Catholic clergy and episcopate.

Feel free to learn more here:

http://www.newoxfordreview.org/dossier.jsp?did=dossier-lavender-mafia


35 posted on 10/10/2006 8:56:34 AM PDT by Ozone34
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Dems_R_Losers

An interesting thing I have noticed watching the Dateline predators series is that the men going after the girls are just guys; truck drivers, computer geeks, factory workers etc., the men going after the boys are; Preachers, Rabbis, teacher, pediatricians, coaches etc. all well educated, well-to-do professional types. I guess Congressmen would fit in that category.

I have also noticed that when the series started it was girls one week, boys the next, then all of a sudden it became all girls all the time. I wonder if the HRC snet NBC an email telling them to pull the plug on the homosexual angle?


36 posted on 10/10/2006 8:57:14 AM PDT by redangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ZGuy

Yet another reason why the Republicans are facing losing seats in Congress. Clean the closet or lose power.


37 posted on 10/10/2006 9:00:56 AM PDT by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
This is all about people with their own agenda to depress the turnout.

Let's repeat this in bold face. This is all we need to remember.

38 posted on 10/10/2006 9:04:50 AM PDT by tsomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: billhilly
You step on a hornet's nest here on FR when you bring up Catholic Church pedophilia

The POINT being made was that the Church sex abuse scandal was mostly NOT pedophilia. It was pederasty/ephebophilia, gay men and teenage boys.

39 posted on 10/10/2006 9:06:21 AM PDT by JohnnyZ ("I respect and will protect a woman's right to choose" -- Mitt Romney, April 2002)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: tsomer
This is all about people with their own agenda to depress the turnout. Let's repeat this in bold face. This is all we need to remember.

And, it's about Americans who know better not standing for the truth: that homosexuality is moral degeneracy and mental disorder.

40 posted on 10/10/2006 9:07:44 AM PDT by unspun (What do you think? Please think, before you answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-95 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson