Time constraints have kept me from responding to this as quickly as I would like, but I think it is still important to comment on a bigoted ad from the Lieberman Senate Campaign. Queerty.com has extensive coverage of the issue, including screen shots and video.
The technique used in the ad was to make Lieberman's opponent, Ned Lamont, look subservient and dependent on former Connecticut Governor Lowell Weicker by putting a pink shirt on his cartoon caricature and giving the Lamont cartoon a high pitched voice. Attacking men by associating female and queer traits with them is reprehensible. It is a personal insult to all queers and to all women.
There is an element of irony. Women like Cindy Sheehan and queers like Harvey Milk have shown more courage and independence than Lieberman is capable of doing.
Lieberman's defenders might point out the Champaign Fund's 100% rating for the incumbent on lgbt issues. However, two terribly important votes on lgbt issues show that such a rating is either outdated or inaccurate. Lieberman cast a viciously homophobic, sexist, and racist vote in favor of confirming John Roberts to the Supreme Court. Joe-mentum cast an equally homophobic, sexist, and racist vote on Alito filibuster, the only Alito vote that affected the outcome of his nomination.
It is no secret that Alito and Roberts have devoted their adult lives to attacking all civil rights and to subverting and undermining the U.S. Constitution. Lieberman didn't just betray the queer community with those votes, he violated his oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution.
Hopefully, the HRC will put aside the pressure of rich, right-wing donors who love Ann Coulter's endorsee, Joseph Lieberman, and endorse Ned Lamont who is better on queer issues.
Psycho Woman Throws Knives At Children
13 years ago
Why would you want to be the "epitome of evil"? Isn't evil "bad"? And if you are portrayed as the epitome of evil, isn't it worth looking into the possibility of actually being same? If someone calls me evil, I must consider whether or not what they are saying is valid. If someone comes up to me and says I have a black smudge on my face, am I just going to reject them for being hateful or whatever? Am I not going to look in the mirror and see if what they said was true?
So, either you are or not the "epitome.." and after doing a "mirror look" you could then state that you are not and why.