Blackmail and Threats From the Right

Maggie Ghallager and her ilk have the gall to accuse us of blackmailing and harassing Yes on 8 supporters by boycotting their businesses, suddenly casting themselves as victims. Not only, as many have pointed out, did the Yes on 8 people publish the names of No on 8 supporters, but people like Ghallager (Bill O'Reilly, who jumped into this) and the rest of the right-wing back have boycotted everything from the country of France to department stores that say won't put the word "Christmas" in their holiday displays.

Now comes the latest: They are threatening the judges of the California Supreme Court if they rescind Prop 8. They're welcoming the court's decision -- as long as it the decision they want.

Boycott of Utah?

There's lots of discussion in the media and on the blogs about a boycott of Utah. We'll get into this on the show today. On the one hand, it is California voters who banned marriage for gays. On the other hand, it was the Mormon Church -- which pretty much owns Utah -- which manipulated voters in California through heinous, lying ads funded by its members more than anyone else:

Utah's growing tourism industry and the star-studded Sundance Film Festival are being targeted for a boycott by bloggers, gay rights activists and others seeking to punish the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for its aggressive promotion of California's ban on gay marriage.

It could be a heavy price to pay. Tourism brings in $6 billion a year to Utah, with world-class skiing, spectacular red-rock country and the film festival founded by Robert Redford among popular tourist draws.

So what do you think?

McDonalds: We "Will Neither Confirm Nor Deny"

McDonald's now will "neither confirm nor deny" using language that was intended to assuage antigay bigots, and that is a problem.

After the American Family Association called off its boycott of McDonald's, the fast food chain claimed, when reporters and activists inquired, that it wasn't in any way making a reversal on gay issues, seeming to contradict the often-distorting and manipulating AFA. This was not, however, something the company was clarifying from the roof tops nor explaining fully.

When our producer David Guggenheim contacted the company for a statement yesterday before show time -- in particular, what we wanted was a clarification of the specifics of the AFA's press release saying that McDonald's wouldn't follow a "homosexual agenda" as defined by the AFA -- we were told that a statement was forthcoming. Late in the day McDonald's sent a vague statement that didn't mention the words gay and lesbian (except for referring by name to the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce), and still didn't clarify their position:

"As we've said all along, McDonald's stands by and supports our people. Diversity and inclusion are integral components of our brand and our heritage.

We continue to have strong employee networks throughout our company and will continue to align our brand with individuals and organizations that share our belief in supporting our people and the communities we serve.

Regarding Richard Ellis, he made a personal decision to step down from the Board of the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce after he accepted a new position earlier this year with McDonald's Restaurants of Canada, Limited.

At McDonald's, we continue to value and respect everyone."

We wrote back again, specifically asking about the AFA's press release which contained a quote they said came from a McDonald's memo sent to franchisee's and which various media reported as a McDonald's memo:

"It is our policy to not be involved in political and social issues. McDonald's remains neutral on same-sex marriage or any 'homosexual agenda' as defined by the American Family Association," the memo said.

The response back from McDonald's p.r. firm regarding that quote?

McDonald's will neither confirm nor deny the authenticity of the "e-mail to McDonald's franchised owners" referred to in the release.

Not good at all.

McDonald's Denies Caving In

We talked a lot about this on the show yesterday. The American Family Association called off its boycott, claiming the company had ceded to its demands and pulled out of the National Lesbian and Gay Chamber of Commerce. Lots of angry calls, though we were all going by the AFA press release -- which is notorious for lying.

We've now spoken with McDonald's and with the gay group, and both are denying any cave in, as this report notes as well. We got more information on it and I'll go through the details on the show. McDonald's isn't exactly trying to clarify this from the roof tops, but that could be more about corporate bureaucracy -- they farm out a lot of their p.r. -- than trying to keep this below the theocrats' radar. But I think there's more to come. We're trying to see get someone from McDonald's on the show.

McCain Returns Manhunt Money

John McCain has returned the money donated to him by Jonathan Crutchley, the chairman of Manhunt.net, who resigned amid the debacle over his donation. As Pam Spaulding notes, McCain is just further humiliating the Log Cabin Republicans and asinine people like Crutchley, who is now trying to do some p.r. spin for himself and his gay sex website business. The exposed former Manhunt chairman had previously described McCain as someone who would be "a better commander in chief" than Obama in this "dangerous age," and said we'd have to get to gay rights later. But now, according to Manhunt co-owner Larry Basile, Crutchley is apparently giving his money to Obama, since "John is too good for my money."

Oh, please. If this thing had never blown up Crutchley would still be giving his money to McCain, even though Mccain said in the past week that he couldn't have a VP running mate who supports "gay rights." (And McCain would be happy to take it, as long as the fundies didn't find out, because he's of course a fraud too.) And Crutchley's reasoning for giving McCain the money wasn't on gay issues anyway: it was the idiotic but still powerful fear card, with Crutchley claiming we needed a strong leader or whatever. So why not continue to back him now if gay issues were never the reason you had backed him before? McCain, after all, is not showing anything different by giving the money back, since he's been courting homophobes all along.

Crutchley is just trying to keep the obviously outraged membership of his site -- which I'm sure he's still making millions from though he resigned as "chairman" -- from bolting further. And don't you love how co-owner Larry Basile is professing shock over Crutchley's donation? ("Boy, was I embarrassed when I found out he gave $2,300,” he told the Boston Herald.) As if he and the other principles didn't know they'd made a Republican -- who is obviously outspoken and finds it an "insult" to be called a liberal -- as their chairman!

Right. Are we really to believe that Basile, when he went into business with Crutchley years ago, had no idea he was hooking up with a homocon? Surely he's much better at due diligence than that. I know, as I was an editor and columnist at the lefty, short-lived but influential OutWeek magazine in the early 90s, where, as Basile now touts, Basile was treasurer (and part owner.) One thing I know about Basile is that he's a shrewd, smart businessman who knows everything that's going on with everyone.

And what took McCain so long to give the money back? Probably wanted to wait until the weekend so as not to get any press. As it was, the media -- his base -- had pretty much blacked it out for days. The only place you saw discussion of it during the week was on the gay blogs. Kudos to Andy Towle at Towleroad for revealing much of this and riding the story.