Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Mfume declares support for same-sex marraige

Some African-American politicians have shied away from the debate over same-sex marriage, saying it has nothing to do for the fight for racial equality they waged decades ago.

Kweisi Mfume
, a former NAACP president and congressman running for the U.S. Senate, is not one of them.

At an Annapolis rally Monday night that drew hundreds of gay men and lesbians, Mfume publicly declared his support for their cause.

"I know that gay bashing and immigrant bashing and union bashing at the end of the day rob us of our moral authority," Mfume said to the crowd.

In an interview, Mfume acknowledged the parallels to the African-American struggle. "I am steeped in the civil rights era," he said. "The law has to be extended so that everybody is protected."

Another candidate for the U.S. Senate, Lise Van Susteren, also attended the rally.

Matt Mosk

By Phyllis Jordan  |  February 13, 2006; 7:26 PM ET
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: O'Malley "too cute" for Jessamy
Next: Planning hire questioned


At some point, the position supporting gay rights will be the default. Massachusetts, Canada, nor England has ceased to exist because of the state acknowledgement of gay relationships.

Jim Brady is a liar. I don't know him; I don't want to know him. I know what he writes and he writes lies. For people who value integrity, it must be unpleasant to work for such a man. Perhaps, if you know him, other personal qualities compensate for his lack of integrity.

Posted by: elliottg | February 13, 2006 9:26 PM | Report abuse

I'm glad a Democrat is finally taking a position on this issue. You always know where the Republicans stand on it (which despite what they say is tinged with homophobia). The Democrats have a horrible time of staking a position on any hard issues. I salute Mr. Mfume for having the guts to make his opinion known, while others have not (and most likely will not).

Posted by: Mr. K | February 14, 2006 8:55 AM | Report abuse

This is what the WaPo has become – an unpaid propaganda outlet for the Bush administration. At first I thought the byline was a joke, but I guess there is a Stephen Hunter who works for the Washington Post.
This execrable load was put on the front page of the website. Let me go through it for any employees who really care to see how far into wingnuttery your paper has descended.
“The answer is only one, and the talk show monologuists will have a merry old time at Vice President Cheney's expense for his hunter's blunder”
Do you see that? He refers to the VP’s shooting a fellow human in the field as a “blunder”. He insulates the VP from an investigation into whether it was more than a blunder. Remember an accident is not innocent when negligence is involved. Ask Bill Janklow about that. We don’t know enough about the incident (news withheld purposely by the administration) to classify it as anything yet and even if it was a complete accident, blunder is too mild to refer to ripping another human being’s face apart with shot.
“So there'll be some partisan coup-counting, some journo-sniggering, and probably a news conference with both the vice president and his friend and very lucky victim Harry Whittington in the near future.”
There, you see, criticizing Cheney is partisan. This is another right wing insulating talking point pulled out every time the facts are inconvenient.
“One thing I've always liked about Cheney is his samurai blankness and refusal to be cuddly for the cameras”
It’s appropriate that this love note to Cheney was published on Valentines Day.
“The fundamental etiquette and safety device of bird hunting is: Obey the line.”
Let’s insert something to prove that this article is not simply propaganda. I’m sure Mr. Hunter reads Playboy for the articles too.
“It can be tough. The pleasure of bird hunting is that unlike still hunting (the duck blind, the deer stand) you are in motion against the texture of the land …as well as heat, thirst, hunger, comfort and emotional state.”
Oooh, aah!!! Cheney participates in a manly sport like hunting, but a type of hunting that is especially macho with a wonderful ode here Hunter shows his literary side. The truth is that they were hunting from cars, walking only the last few feet to the coveys stocked with farm-raised quail. Descriptions of past hunting expeditions have been published elsewhere, but this was no different.
“It appears the vice president lost contact with the line. News reports indicate that…”
News reports are sketchy and incomplete because the VP and everyone around him have gone into full CYA mode. This reconstruction seems authoritative, but how it gets published with anything other than skepticism is a mystery to me.
“For one thing, the vice president has selected his bird and his mind is busy solving the geometric problem of lead and flight time.”
Let’s extol VP’s skills once again.
“If you take your eye from the target to divert to the sights, the whole elegant choreography falls apart and you miss.”
No. No. No. The fundamental rule of hunting with other people is not watch the line. That is actually a subpoint to the fundamental rule which is always be aware of the others in your party. This ode to the shot is just covering up the prima facia conclusion that Cheney violated THE fundamental hunting rule
At this point, I think as I write this, do I have to go on? Isn’t it obvious, yet? Probably not to Jim Brady so I persevere.
“Some may say of Cheney: He was really unlucky.
I say: He was really lucky
He was lucky to be so superb a wing shot that he carried a shotgun in 28-gauge rather than 12-gauge.”
More wingnut love – “a superb wing shot”? – hunting farm-raised quail stocked bythe hundreds? And the outdoor editor of your paper should know that you do not hunt quail with a 12 guage if you have the option of using a smaller bore. Shots taken on quail are typically at closer range than for duck or geese. In addition, they are smaller birds.
“The 28 is for advanced bird hunters who've killed their thousands with a 12”
That is really just BS. There’s no other way to say it. Cheney was using a 28 because he knew that he was going to get close, easy shots at the birds and because he is 65 years old with a heart condition and would prefer not to receive that punch in the shoulder you get every time you pull the trigger on a 12.
“My almost kill wasn't a lawyer, it was a dog.”
Ok. I will stop here since the rest of the article is an excuse related by personal anecdote of the “it can happen to anyone” variety. I will point out that there is a big difference between a man and a dog. Dog’s move faster are more unpredictable and are less valuable. It’s embarrassing and wrong to shoot your dog by mistake but at least an order of magnitude difference in terms of egregiousness.
“You can't get those moments back. You can only learn from them. If you don't, then you're even stupider.”
I hope there is someone at the Post who, after reading this, has learned something. You might as well work for The Washington Times or Fox News.

Jim Brady is a liar. I don't know him; I don't want to know him. I know what he writes and he writes lies. For people who value integrity, it must be unpleasant to work for such a man. Perhaps, if you know him, other personal qualities compensate for his lack of integrity.

Posted by: elliottg | February 14, 2006 10:16 AM | Report abuse

Forgot the link to the original article. It is really sad what the Washington Post has become.

Posted by: elliottg | February 14, 2006 10:18 AM | Report abuse

elliottg, your rant has what to do with Mfume supporting gay marriage?

Posted by: MK | February 14, 2006 11:05 AM | Report abuse

elliottg, i can send your note directly to stephen hunter if you like...and take it off the blog.

Posted by: Phyllis Jordan | February 14, 2006 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Thank you Phyllis, but MK correctly identified my note as a rant and its intended audience is not Mr. Hunter, but a wider and more anonymous. I sent a note to Mr. Hunter pointing out that using a 12 for quail is not common, but, in truth, I might have to retract that statement since many people only own one gun for bird hunting. Also, you would want a bigger bore if you were in the field and hunting multiple type birds (quail being the smallest). The more accurate statement is included in my rant above which is you would choose a smaller bore if given the option.

If you feel you must remove it, then I guess you do what you have to do, but I prefer it stay where it is. If you want to send it to anyone, then please send it to Deborah Howell and Jim Brady with the annotation that there should be an appropriate forum to make comments such as this. That appropriate forum would seem to me to be a general blog with meta-Washington Post news and information. It seems that there is such a blog, but, alas, no comments are allowed at that virtual location.

Posted by: elliottg | February 14, 2006 1:58 PM | Report abuse

One last update to my rant:


1 records found in 0.2656 seconds.

Search Criteria:
Donor name: Hunter
Donor occupation: Washington Post
Cycle(s) selected: 2006, 2004, 2002

Start another search

Sort by Name
Sort by Date
Sort by Amount

Total for this search: $250










National Republican Congressional Cmte

Surprised? I'm not.

Posted by: elliottg | February 14, 2006 8:11 PM | Report abuse

Stephen Hunter is also a Pulitizer prize winning film critic...and he likes to hunt. He seldom delves into politics.

Posted by: Phylllis Jordan | February 15, 2006 7:40 AM | Report abuse

I am indeed surprised. A Republican Washington Post writer? A rare creature indeed.

Posted by: MK | February 15, 2006 9:04 AM | Report abuse

He shouldn't be allowed to write anything that could be remotely political by the editors given that he is so obviously biased. With only a few modifications, his 2/14 ??? (can't find a word) could have been an Onion article. Politics and integrity is not the end all and be all of the "person", but it is an integral part of the reporter. The Post fails all too often in this regard.

Posted by: elliottg | February 15, 2006 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Is it not ironic that only since Mr. Mfume has found himself at the bottom of the fundraising spectrum that he has begun to openly support gay marriage rights and other liberal organizations like PETA? This is obviously a fundraising ploy to try and attract donations from people that tend to be financially well off. Where was Mr. Mfume months ago to take a stance on all of these issues? This is a nice try to raise money by his team of financial experts, but as a member of the gay community I will make sure that people do not fall for this lame attempt to hoodwink the gay community. There are several other candidates in this race that have supported gay issues from day one- and that are not looking to exploit the gay community for economic gain.

Posted by: Michael | February 15, 2006 1:06 PM | Report abuse

For the record, Mfume has STILL NOT TAKEN A POSITION on Gay Marriage.

He keeps saying "I oppose a constitutional amendment to ban" same-sex marriage, but he refuses to say he supports same-sex marriage.

This is just a political dance. There are other viable candidates -- Lise Van Susteren and Allan Lichtman -- who have had the courage to take a position. This is just Mfume trying to speak out of both sides of his mouth.

Posted by: Ron | February 28, 2006 5:24 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company