First, a quick thanks to Taylor for the invitation to join other guest bloggers here at TM. I’m appreciative of the opportunity, and look forward to conversation.
Framing. Ideology. Perspective. Or maybe, bias. It’s very much in the eye of the tweeter reader.
Last Tuesday (January 4) Sarah Palin retweeted a comment by conservative radio host Tammy Bruce (who is “openly” lesbian, and chairs the advisory board of GOProud, a pro-gay rights Republican group). Bruce’s original tweet referred to Owen Honors, the captain of the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise who was relieved of that command Tuesday when a part of his past commandery actions came to light. A few years ago, while second-in-command, Honors was responsible for a series of videos described variously as “offensive,” “lewd” and “ribald,” and shown on the ship’s closed-circuit television system. The video skits, in which Honors frequently participated, were said to have been made to relieve boredom and boost morale, which apparently required much sexual innuendo, straight and gay.
So, Bruce reads about Honors and the gay jabs (as someone described them), considering her own support for the repeal of DADT, and sends this tweet:“But this hypocrisy is just truly too much. Enuf already – the more someone complains about the homos the more we should look under their bed.” (Or under the bus?)
Palin retweets, and with it came almost immediate speculation about what she meant — was it a tacit endorsement of the repeal of DADT? Was it a “having it both ways,” able to say she’d forwarded something that supported repeal, while also maintaining her ability to truthfully say she hadn’t said that at all? Or maybe she didn’t read carefully, and wasn’t aware what she was sending to her tweeter followers. Whatever, the incident raised questions on both left and right, and provides yet another example of something about the power of framing.
Palin is conservative. Repeal of DADT is liberal / progressive. That’s what our either / or political and ideological framing tells us, at least. When one’s ideology values tradition, customs and conventions, and the stability and maintenance of the same, it isn’t absolutely necessary, but examples abound to tell us it isn’t unusual, either, to resist what appears to challenge the comfortable status quo. When one’s ideology values needed reform, transformation, updates, and change, then it isn’t unusual to see that, in fact, the status of the quo needs to be challenged. Just because something “was” and “is” doesn’t necessarily mean it “should be,” forever and ever. Of course, it also doesn’t mean there aren’t ideas and beliefs of lasting value, either. But how “change” is understood makes a difference.
I acknowledge, those are generalized and simplistic “definitions,” and that those who hold both perspectives will have differing interpretations. I doubt there is any ambiguity about my own take on each, as I am certain the liberal perspective which frames what I see is quite obvious.
But given generalities, and back to Palin’s retweet: forwarding the pro-DADT-repeal is one example of how the world of Queerdom (as well as other “different” groups) is often viewed, and framed, and acted upon. In my own liberal persuasion, what I hear, and what I’ve experienced, from many (not all) of the conservative persuasion – especially among the more vocal — lets me know I, as a lesbian, am not a part of their comfortable status quo framing of equal rights.
That’s changing in some significant ways, actually. Polls show more and more people are supportive of LGBT rights. But whatever the specific focus, when “tradition” is challenged and stability shaken, a common response is to retreat into the safety of the known, and not infrequently, to attack the unknown “different.”
After Palin retweeted Bruce’s message, and the questions began, Bruce followed up, tweeting, “I think @SarahPalinUSA RT my tweet is her first comment on DADT, treatment of gays & attempts to marginalize us–thank you Governor.” Followed by, “I know Gov Palin & this ‘anti-gay’ meme has been a lie–plain & simple. She’s a decent woman & friend to the community.”
What Palin actually thinks about DADT, and Queerdom in general, is unclear. The Washington Post reports that in February of 2010, in a Fox News interview, “she said she was surprised that President Obama was pushing to repeal the ban – but she never condemned his position on the substance. ‘There are other things to be worried about right now with the military,’ Palin said. ‘I think that kind of on the back burner’” (a position familiar to many whose needs don’t match those of the Elites).
Bruce also said she thought Palin’s retweet was aimed at the conservative groups choosing not to attend the upcoming Conservative Political Action Conference because GOProud is a sponsor. A clearly conservative opinion was offered by Mathew Staver, founder of the Liberty Counsel, which is one of those not attending the CPAC. He hedges: “I doubt if she has changed her position, but if she has, she will have lost a large base of her support.” He speculated, though, that Palin “opposes the ‘homosexual agenda’ in general.
The LesbianConservative had a rather different view: “The fact that such a major event like CPAC has welcomed a gay organization should serve clear notice on the virulent anti-gay wing of the conservative movement. Homosexuality can no longer continue to be the bugbear of US conservatism.”
From Dennis Ayers at AfterEllen.com, we see a progressive kind of hopefulness: “This is great for the GLBT community I think, because … it advances that meme amongst her conservative fanbase that the vocally anti-gay probably have something of their own to hide.”
Andrew Belonsky, at Change.org writes that “Gawker’s Max Read was right on the money when he wrote, ‘Palin is not, in the context of her party, rabidly homophobic.’ But if Palin ‘truly wants to win over the LGBT set, she needs to take action — and, contrary to popular opinion, a re-tweet is not ‘action’– by actively opposing her party’s entrenched homophobia and discrimination …”
John Aravosis, at AmericanBlog, was as clear in his own assessment of Palin as he was in his assessment of this incident. “Yes, she’s an idiot. But she’s also a powerful leader in the GOP. This is important.”
I haven’t seen anything linking the Palin Retweet to this, but a couple of days later John McCain said of the DADT repeal, “I think I have to do everything I can to make sure that the [impact on the] morale, retention, recruitment and battle effectiveness of the military is minimized as much as possible.” Not a ringing endorsement of repeal, but perhaps a recognition that things are changing. A very much resisted, disliked, and apparently frightening change, but a tiny move out of the comfortableness of “this is how things are, should and forever shall be.”
Without uttering a word herself, Palin generated yet another conservative / liberal conversation. Or rather, another round of mostly internal conservative conversations and liberal conversations. That’s not to say there is internal agreement in either group. But as Aravosis writes, “This is important.” Palin’s is a voice that is heard by a lot of people, and whether she does or doesn’t support the repeal of DADT the retweet served to nudge some of the right to state their support for change. Of course it also nudged others to repeat “homosexual agenda” claims as if those claims are as sacred to them as the Bible, Constitution and totally straight Founding Fathers.
Interestingly, Bruce says she’s never asked Palin about her DADT views. Maybe that’s another instance of “I won’t ask so you don’t have to tell and upset anyone” kind of thing. No doubt, though, Palin will be asked, and by now, may have been and I haven’t seen it. But my liberal leanings yearn for answers and actions, so for what it’s worth: Gov. Palin, should DADT be repealed? Or better yet, should Queerdom residents have equal rights? If so, why? If not, why? And in either case, what actions will you take (beyond a tweet)?
As I said earlier, how you understand “change” is important. For me, and liberally speaking, a change for the good requires a bigger picture view, including the big picture view of the entire Constitution, not just bits and pieces. A “change for the general welfare” kind of good.
Thanks for the post Joyce Arnold. I am a Sarah Palin fan and Gay and I would love for Sarah Palin to embrace Gay Rights. I believe people can change their views if they open their mind and meet others who are different and more or likely they found out were not that much different were human beings.
I for one will be thrilled if Palin’s retweet indicates some kind of gay support. I don’t know that it does, but neither do I know it doesn’t. I do know that I’m very tired of “the gays” being what a few election cycles ago was referred to as “wedge issue.”
Thanks for commenting
“I don’t know that it does, but neither do I know it doesn’t.” -Joyce Arnold
If she truly supported the repeal of DADT or any gay rights…she would have long ago pushed the issue by now. She is at the moment perhaps politically testing it out with her base by using that lame re-tweet as cover. If she does not get a lot of blow back from stepping her toes into the gay rights issues…than Palin will go for it. But if enough of her religious base pushes back…Sarah will drop the topic like a hot potatoes.
Sarah Palin could have voiced her opinion on DADT way before it was ended. Instead she cowardly re-tweeted someone else message. She has no problem making her voice heard on issues like childhood obesity, Health care,Abortion, Afghan etc…
But on this issue she dances around it. Sarah claims to be a tough mama grizzly but hides when her political neck has to be put on the line and go against her religious base. If she ever became President don’t look for to stand up for Gay rights. In fact, I’d be shocked if she did. Anyway, I don’t blame the Gay community in hedging its bets between both Republican and Democrat bases. After all each party has its pros and cons when comes to civil rights for all.
No argument from me, Marie, that Palin could and should have spoken out earlier, if she supports repeal. The only DADT related comment I could find was, as I said in the post, about it being a “backburner” kind of thing. That’s no an unsual tactic for politicians, but neither is it an example of “leadership.”
Joyce Arnold…I think she is scared to lead on the issue. Palin knows that she must expand her base of supports…however, she is trying to figure out away to do it without losing all those tea party folks. Honestly, I think she may harbor certain liberal views…that may be consider extreme by her religious base. I would to see Sarah Palin broaden herself politically. But she seemed stuck in neutral playing to the same base that help Christine O’Donnell win in Delaware…but was not enough for her to win the general.
Plus, the constant negative rhetoric thrown at the Obama family by Palin does no help enlighten her to the millions that voted for the man. I mean we all get Obama weakness by now…but having them being bought up by her repeatedly for almost three years straight can become annoying…lol
Sarah Palin needs to focus on improving her image if she expects to overcome anyone in 2012.
“I think she is scared to lead on the issue.” – Marie
She does have that in common with most politicians, and Electeds
lol
Sarah Palin loves to play like she’s all tough and adventurous and yet she is such a political coward that she won’t just come out and say what she believes? So much for her outside the beltway bona fides.
I’m personally not even convinced Palin does all her own tweeting or facebooking but I have no proof of that. For the record, I feel that way about most politicians. I’m sure they do sometimes but I doubt all the time.
My own opinion is Tammy Bruce is giving Palin a bit too much credit under the circumstances. If Palin is really respectful of people’s RIGHTS, including gay people, then why doesn’t she come out and say so? One tweet isn’t a whole lot to go on. It sounds to me like Bruce is hoping Palin is pro-gay because it would fit into Bruce’s worldview but there really isn’t a whole lot of evidence of that, retweet or no retweet.
I know that question has been raised, SCB, about whether Palin does her own tweeting or Facebooking. It goes out her name, of course, so the responsibility is there, regardless.
Bruce is interpreting, or speculating about, what Palin thinks and believes. I think it’s important that she (Bruce) acknowledges she’d never asked Palin her DADT views, a sort of “free pass” for Palin. Liberty Counsel’s Staver does the same kind of thing in speculating Palin opposes the “homosexual agenda,” but (at least that he acknowledges) hasn’t actually asked her.
Of course, all of this is politics as usual — provide deniability, wiggle room, etc., for the politician / Elected.
Obama promised he would repeal DADT, made sure it figured on the agenda of congress and the Dems in Congress get this DADT repeal passed despite huge GOP opposition. Barely acknowledged in this anti-Obama hate site. It is all activist hardwork, maybe Lieberman played some role, but Obama oh-noooooo what a douche, because he did not show “strong enough” support and did not spend his whole year advocating for gay rights every single day.
But Palin retweets someone else’s tweet, does not even dare to take a stand, and may or may not support the already passed DADT repeal. And it is all speculation worth a thousand word. It is worth the first Joyce Arnold thread. Wow change we definitely believe in. Whatever.
This woman should run for president, there is something about her that fascinates everyone, even those she so clearly does not support or advocate for. Despite yesterday’s mega f**** up, it is all about what Palin thinks. Whatever.
Joyce was very balanced and fair to Palin in her post and has been quite critical of the lack of a fierce advocate in the WH right now.
Ack, scratch that last comment of mine @ 4:17 yesterday. Had a horrible headache setting in when I commented, not that that’s any excuse, but I skimmed NotImpressed’s post WAY too quickly.
I mistakenly got the impression he or she was saying Obama didn’t get the same scrutiny Pain is getting and that Joyce was being unfair to Palin.
Chalk it up to seeing too much Palin apologia this weekend and having had my limit on patience to actually hear this crap out anymore.
Anyhow, sorry NotImpressed. I see what you’re saying now. Regarding Obama not getting credit on the DADT repeal…I actually blogged about this very issue a couple weeks back– toward the bottom of this post. I feel silly quoting myself, so I’ll just summarize: Obama can take the credit. It’s not the credit that is the point. It’s the taking responsibility and leading the fight for liberal ideals that is the point.
I actually agree with you more generally about having Palin fatigue. However, I think Joyce was really looking at this more from the perspective of the LGBT community and ALL politicians and holding them accountable to their words, deeds, and actions.
meant to say… accountable for their words etc.
NotImpressed, Obama played politics with DADT. And I’ve made the point multiple times that the progress in repeal is primarily that of activists. Not politicians. Not even organizations, though there has been a lot of very good work by some of them, too.
About Palin’s retweet — I’m more interested in how people responded, which is why I took the time to gather a variety of those responses, and think a bit about how the right / left, conservative / liberal framing is at play. I’ve been watching and active in the conservative / liberal dynamics for a scary number of years now, and this is just one example of that dynamic.
About Palin — I think she is utterly unprepared for elected office. I think she is also a voice to which many do, in fact, pay attention, whatever my opinions.
Hooray! It is so wonderful to see Joyce as a frontpager! Great post and topic. Looking forward to Queer Talk…and maybe an accessible podcast someday!
I’m not convinced that Palin or whoever was at the helm of her twitter account understood what she was retweeting. It would be really pathetic if she retweeted it thinking it was some kind of derisive anti-gay tweet.
I think her and Tammy Bruce are good friends. I wish I knew the conversations between the two of them, who knows if Sarah Palin believes what she says, I have always wondered that. Sarah Palin could really believe in gay rights but not saying it out loud, she needs to get brave and say if she does not not. Maybe we will find out sooner or later.
Thanks, Wonk. The steps are agonizingly slow, but someday on that podcast ….
Lots of people share that idea, that Palin, or someone taking care of tweets for her, inadvertently retweeted, not understanding what Bruce had said. And truth is, it would have taken a bit of information to put together that it was about both the Honors videos and DADT.
The fact that, at least to my knowledge, Palin hasn’t offered any comments — maybe she doesn’t think it’s that important. Maybe she figures if she waits a while, it will go away, which of course, it will.
Reading Bruce and Conservative Lesbian, one good thing is to see more from the right saying things like “Homosexuality can no longer continue to be the bugbear of US conservatism.”
I agree secyclintonblog, I think she should step up and say if she is for gay rights or not. She might have liberal views but she is afraid that some in her base will bail if she comes out for gay rights. I don’t agree with her social views such as abortion, among other things but their are actually gay fans of hers such as myself that would love for her to stand up for gay rights in one form or another. Hell, she could expand her base if she opened herself up more for gay rights. Maybe this is a step forward for her. One can only hope.
Welcome Joyce! …NotImpressed, too.
I really hope you all will use the share tools to blas the news of Joyce’s “Queer Talk.” Others need to know she’s weighing in & laying it down.
Great stuff, Joyce.
Thanks, Taylor. And again, thanks for the opportunity. May the conversations continue …
Off grid, but there’s a story on HuffPost (mobile) talking about anti-gay protests coming at funerals for AZ domestic terrorism.
Never ends.
The Phelps clan, always finding ways to be more hurtful.
You can see the mailing / poster from Westboro Baptist Church, Fred Phelps at the link below. Be warned, it’s their usual very ugly stuff, the kind LGBT’s have been getting for years; Phelp’s then started targeting servicemembers killed in action (God’s punishing the U.S., Phelps says, because it accepts “homosexuals”). In typical language:
“Thank God for the shooter-6 Dead! WBC (Westboro Baptist Church) Will Picket Their Funerals!”
http://joemygod.blogspot.com/
I think one of them (or rather their cousins, figuratively speaking) struck on that Elizabeth Edwards youtube tribute I made. He didn’t say anything about gays but went spamming my video and other EE videos about babykillers.
That would fit, unfortunately.
I remember standing across from some of the Phelps’ clan in Nashville, some years ago, and thinking that having the young girl with them (maybe 8 or 9 years old), a grandchild I’d guess, was a form of child abuse.
Joyce,
First as a gay man and everyday reader here i thank-you. Thanks also to Taylor for giving us all a wonderful place to share..
Thanks, tony. I very much look forward to future conversations with you.
So glad you stopped by to read Joyce. She’s going to regularly post every Saturday afternoon.
msm has been hounding palin and tea party- on all the big 3. repubs on defensive big time for once.
Maybe, just maybe, the whole horrible thing will make some people stop and think, even if just for a while, about the power of words.
And once again, T4H, thanks for all your great work yesterday.