http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...3-2002Dec5.html


Bush lie?? No way!

McCain (R-Ariz.) said he will "assume all future assurances and promises by this administration to be quite possibly insincere."

"The Bush administration has broken their word on an issue that has been of transcendent importance to me, and that's hard to get over," said McCain

[ December 06, 2002: Message edited by: RazorbackTX ]

See if this link works, the one above wouldn't for me.

McCain Throws a Hissy Fit

1. Bush said he would appoint this chick.
2. Bush appointed this chick.

Where's the lie? John McCain being mad because he's not president doesn't make Bush a liar.

I think McCain's frustration was that in July, Bush promised to appoint her "speedily". Now she's being appointed after a sunstantial number of decisions have been made (at least that seems to be the jist of it). Sounds like McCain should have gotten a date on paper for when she would be appointed.

This administration had best be easy with how they treat McCain though, he could be an important vote.

[quote]Originally posted by DC_guy:
Sounds like McCain should have gotten a date on paper for when she would be appointed.

---

Isn't a lot of politics based on trust within certain circles?

I suspect a lot of important political decisions are not put on paper unless they can be held secret and/or denied later.

I'm not saying it's a good thing or that I agree with it, I'm just saying that he's in the position of complaining about something that got done. It's simply his opinion of what should have happened.

It sounds to me like McCain is still getting grief for embarrassing Bush early in the primaries of the last presidential election. Although McCain sometimes gets on my nerves, I do think he will make a fuss when "business as usual" gets a little shady.

[ January 02, 2003: Message edited by: Ump25 ]

let me say this as an avid McCain supporter and admirer as well as a faithful republican who is a proudly out gay man.

John McCain is a confirmed war hero, ex-POW guest at the "Hanoi Hilton" and a person who is not afraid to speak and ACT with conviction on what he deems to be the right thing to do. Whether that act is putting through Campaign Finance Reformation or sticking it to Barbra Streisand on Saturday Night Live, he has always done what he says and said what he believes.

Having established that, to me it's very very rich that Senator McCain is getting attacked and belittled by a couple of fags who post their opinions online while continuing to live their own lives in the closet afraid that their peers would discover their sexual orientation.

when you guys can act with as much courage as does Sen. McCain, then you can admonish him to go "get his rattle"

[ December 09, 2002: Message edited by: ung ]

[ December 09, 2002: Message edited by: ung ]

[ December 09, 2002: Message edited by: ung ]

take it down a notch UNG....

nobody is condemning McCain here. Just questioning something he did. This is America, where people are allowed to question things.

And regardless of your party affiliation and/or support of McCain, it's pretty much general knowledge (in Washington at least) that McCain has a temper and is a bit of a loose cannon at time. Not that that makes him a bad person, but it's just a part of who he is.

And I don't think namecalling other members of this board, who you know nothing about, is really called for.

McCain is a loon, and would be much more of a hero if he had refused to serve in that evil war.

[quote]Originally posted by Bill W:
McCain is a loon, and would be much more of a hero if he had refused to serve in that evil war.

---

I'll agree he is a bit of a loose cannon as another has noted, but it's important to recognize his being the at least the third in a line of career military officers, and that he saw serving in the navy as a distinct honor no matter the war he faught. "that evil war" as you call it Bill, wasn't considered so evil until we really saw what we were getting into. I'll bet McCain saw a very real opportunity (however misguided) for the US to prevail.

He thinks very well of himself, and perhaps its accurate to say he's even a little narcissistic, but given the overall tone of what he has done in his career, I'd say he's a good egg.

btw. his/snl's attack on Streisand was a little uncalled for and I daresay, unAmerican, as she IS entitiled to express her opinion. she's actually very astute politically speaking.

The thing I like about McCain, well two things, actually, he says we need political reform, which we do, in the worst possible way, and secondly he has acknowledged Mark Bingham many many times, as a true national hero, because Mark really believed in alot of things Senator McCain stood for. He almost sounds more and more like a closet Democrat!

dupontred,

let me explain what I said and why I said it. Ump25 is a frequent poster of this board who has had several threads on this site dedicated to why and how he is in the closet. I know what I know about hois life because he has said it himself.

we all agree that he has his right to stay in the closet but as such he can not take pot shots at someone who IS acting on his convictions

I hope McCain continues to keep an eye on the Bush administration and speaks out as often as possible. Someone in the party needs to stop blindly following the administrations' greedy and corrupt mandate.

[quote]Originally posted by ung:
we all agree that he has his right to stay in the closet but as such he can not take pot shots at someone who IS acting on his convictions

---

Theoretically, then, a closeted gay man could never criticize anybody about anything, since most anything anybody does is based on some sort of conviction. In fact, people generally run for political office based on some sort conviction. By your logic, then, closeted gay men should not be allowed to vote, since doing so would be an act of conviction, which, according to you, at least, closeted gay men are imcapable of. Jeez, and you guys think Republicans are oppressive.

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: Tarkus ]

[quote]Originally posted by ung:
we all agree that he has his right to stay in the closet but as such he can not take pot shots at someone who IS acting on his convictions

---

It wasn't much of a potshot, but more importantly, there's nothing wrong with someone's being in the closet and taking potshots at politicians. There's nothing hypocritical about it either, unless said closeted person makes some sort of anti-gay statements.

[quote]Originally posted by ung:
Having established that, to me it's very very rich that Senator McCain is getting attacked and belittled by a couple of fags who post their opinions online while continuing to live their own lives in the closet afraid that their peers would discover their sexual orientation.

---

Hmmmm. McCain spoke quite highly of Mark Bingham when he was on Leno a few months back.

[ January 02, 2003: Message edited by: Ump25 ]

As things are now in this country, I'm sure many people wonder when this administration will simply invite those who don't believe what they believe to leave. Streisand and Baldwin were simply expressing what many people fear the most: A Bush administration. And most of those fears are coming true, unfortunately for all.

And I'm sure we all can enjoy Ump's calling someone like Streisand a liar and a nutso. She may be eccentric as many very rich, very talented, and very successful people are, but at least she has the integrity to be herself, to speak out for what she believes in a media driven culture just waiting to criticize. Come on, Ump, you calling an outspoken person like Streisand a liar is beneath you. She's been a great advocate for gay rights as well. Don't you know some gay people?

Exactly. Whether you like her politics or not, I find it really sort of lame that any gay person could slam Babs too hard. She has been tireless in her support of gay people and gay rights, etc. You gotta give her props for that. Jeez. Same with Liz Taylor. I think we owe them a little respect for that alone. Sure they are all a bit narcissistic, as are most actors by nature, and most politicians for that matter.

And I think Ung's point about there being courage and conviction involved in coming out of the closet has some real merit to it. As we all know, that wasn't easy. It might even mean more since Ung is an out, proud, right wing crackpot, given some of his statements on here. Having known him for years on the tennis tournament circuit I can also say he's a nice fellow, decent tennis player, and cute little prepster. Gotta love him.

[ January 02, 2003: Message edited by: Ump25 ]

Ump - I know that you know that Babs and Baldwin said they'd leave the country if Bush was elected during the heat of the 2002 campaign. What an incredibly silly and unsubstantial excuse for you to call her a liar. That's stretching in a rather flimsy and pathetic way. If that's all it takes for you to call someone a liar..well, I guess you have your own ideas about truth and honesty.

Obviously no one here expects you to give a flying f*ck about gay rights. Or to support or give credit to those who support equality under the law for gay people.

[quote]Originally posted by bryan d.:
And I'm sure we all can enjoy Ump's calling someone like Streisand a liar and a nutso.

---

I know I sure do.

Wasn't there some Barbara Streisand thing where she put up on her website that you should dry your clothes on a line in your backyard to save energy? When asked if she practiced what she preached, her spokesman said something like, "Those suggestions were intended for other people." I'll have to find that, I'm pretty sure I remember it.

[quote]Originally posted by bryan d.:
And I'm sure we all can enjoy Ump's calling someone like Streisand a liar and a nutso. She may be eccentric as many very rich, very talented, and very successful people are, but at least she has the integrity to be herself, to speak out for what she believes in a media driven culture just waiting to criticize. Come on, Ump, you calling an outspoken person like Streisand a liar is beneath you. She's been a great advocate for gay rights as well. Don't you know some gay people?

---

Do you respect, say, David Duke? Whether you agree with him or not, he certainly "has the integrity to be himself, to speak out for what he believes in a media driven culture just waiting to criticize." How about Fred Phelps - the "God hates fags" guy. Whether you agree with him or not, he certainly "has the integrity to be himself, to speak out for what he believes in a media driven culture just waiting to criticize." I don't know where people get this integrity fetish.

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: Tarkus ]

[quote]Originally posted by ung:
we all agree that he has his right to stay in the closet but as such he can not take pot shots at someone who IS acting on his convictions

---

Good point ung, not to mention the fact that he has said he is not in favor of gay rights which is not a particulary brave thing to do when you are hiding in the closet.

Major league umpire? Yeah, right.

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: RazorbackTX ]

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: Tarkus ]

OK, just to clarify: To whom on this board does Ump owe anything? And why is it that just because he disagrees with you guys politically he is thus not allowed to have political opinions? You guys can be the biggest f*$&ing fascists when you put your alleged minds to it.

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited to be more insulting by: William1865 ]

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: William1865 ]

[quote]Originally posted by William1865:
OK, just to clarify: To whom on this board does Ump owe anything? And why is it that just because he disagrees with you guys politically he is thus not allowed to have political opinions? You guys can be the biggest f*$&ing fascists when you put your alleged minds to it.

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited to be more insulting by: William1865 ]

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: William1865 ]

---

Must have hit a nerve among the closet cases.
I dont think Ump "owes anything" to anybody on
this board, that doesnt mean I have to beleive him when he claims to be a major league umpire.
Im all for him expressing his opinion, its a free country (for the time being.)

Ump, pious much? What do you mean by "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."? I also think Taylor and Striesand never got off the disorient express but I also think they are true in their convictions. So all these republican women who do charitable work, are they on that road to hell too? I think McCain is good for everyone. He's not going to lock step under Bush and that makes him the outcast? That's not politics, that's totalitarianism. Just how one dimensional is your world? Hey, have an opinion, just don't start judging who is fit for hell. Unless, your that perfect then I would really like to meet you.

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: budge ]

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: budge ]

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: budge ]

[quote]Originally posted by RazorbackTX:

Must have hit a nerve among the closet cases.
I dont think Ump "owes anything" to anybody on
this board, that doesnt mean I have to beleive him when he claims to be a major league umpire.
Im all for him expressing his opinion, its a free country (for the time being.)

---

Raze, Raze, Raze. Everytime somebody questions what you say you smugly claim to have "hit a nerve," implying some sort of irrationality on the part of those who disagree with you. I hardly see how this is fair. Perhaps you just opened a particular line of inquiry that others feel compelled to question, based not on any knee-jerk reaction (which is implied by the nerve analogy) but rather on their own personal views and convictions. It happens, I hear.

Moreover, Ung or whoever suggested that Ump shouldn't criticize McCain because Ump is in the closet, and you agreed. This certainly sounds like a condition placed on free speech and expression to me. I'm sure Ump's big enough to take care of himself, but - at the risk of striking a nerve - it just bugs me that the guys who are the biggest proponents of tolerance and diversity are the most rigidly ideological, narrow-minded zealots in town.

(And for what it's worth, I don't think it is fair to question Ump's honesty and integrity appropos of absolutely nothing, save for some unpopular (at least here, anyway) political beleifs. Besides, if he was determined to concoct some elaborate charade in which he portrays himself as a closeted gay man in an openly straight sports environment, why in the world would he pose as a major league umpire? Why not a player or a coach? Nothing against umpires, obviously, but it just seems a bit random to be made up.)

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: William1865 ]

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: Tarkus ]

[quote]Originally posted by William1865:



Raze, Raze, Raze. Everytime somebody questions what you say you smugly claim to have "hit a nerve," implying some sort of irrationality on the part of those who disagree with you. I hardly see how this is fair. Perhaps you just opened a particular line of inquiry that others feel compelled to question, based not on any knee-jerk reaction (which is implied by the nerve analogy) but rather on their own personal views and convictions. It happens, I hear.

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: William1865 ]

---

Bill, Bill, Bill, I stand by my hitting a nerve comment. I must have hit one with you for you to be calling me a f*$&ing fascist, I mean you are usually such a sweetheart. (By the way, is it possible for me to be a "fascist", "Nazi" and a "liberal" all at the same time?)

Im quite sure ump can take care of himself and Im also pretty sure he could care less what I think. Should I not be able to say that I dont believe he is an umpire? What about the free speech you are preaching about?

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: Tarkus ]

[quote]Originally posted by RazorbackTX:

Im quite sure ump can take care of himself and Im also pretty sure he could care less what I think. Should I not be able to say that I dont believe he is an umpire? What about the free speech you are preaching about?

---

Yes, of course, you are more than welcome to say whatever you want. You can rent a Cessna and fly a banner reading "Ump's not an Ump" over the Texas Rangers Opening Day game, as far as I care. Why is it that people interpret any questioning of speech as an attempt to silence it? This is just like the Jeremy Shockey fans who claimed we wanted to take away his rights based on gay criticism of his comments. Not to belabor the point (too late, I know) but you guys seem to be suggesting that a closeted gay man should be somehow excluded - how is not specified - from political debate based on what you people perceive to be a lack of conviction on the closeted gay man's part. This is really dangerous thinking. And besides - who are you to define "convictions?" Perhaps it is Ump's conviction that keeping a very unique and perhaps even lucrative job open only to a very select number of men is more important at this point in his life than any alleged personal or political satisfaction he may or may not receive by being openly gay in a field that is at best not ready for and at worst hostile to homosexuality. In closing (as bad speechmakers say to indicate they are finished with a particular topic), that seems like a perfectly valid and even intelligent conviction to me.

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: Tarkus ]

[quote]Originally posted by William1865:


Yes, of course, you are more than welcome to say whatever you want. You can rent a Cessna and fly a banner reading "Ump's not an Ump" over the Texas Rangers Opening Day game, as far as I care.

---

Hmmmmmmmmmm, not sure how else to say this...
I encourage Ump to give his opinions, I often get a nice chuckle out of them!

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: Tarkus ]

[quote]Originally posted by mattkorey:
Exactly. Whether you like her politics or not, I find it really sort of lame that any gay person could slam Babs too hard. She has been tireless in her support of gay people and gay rights, etc. You gotta give her props for that. Jeez. Same with Liz Taylor. I think we owe them a little respect for that alone. Sure they are all a bit narcissistic, as are most actors by nature, and most politicians for that matter.

---

I'm no lover of the die hard republican opinions that are placed here, but this advice should also be applied to the Log Cabin Republicans. Although they are not on the same side as the majority of gays, they are supporters of gay rights and deserve some of our respect for that.

That being said, all we owe is some respect and the maturity to listen to their ideas, not a tacit agreement because they're gay or gay positive.

[quote]Originally posted by RazorbackTX:


Hmmmmmmmmmm, not sure how else to say this...
I encourage Ump to give his opinions, I often get a nice chuckle out of them!

---

Ump doesn't need to give his opinions, because I'm speaking for him. I'm his publicist. You didn't know that? Ump's been around spoiled athletes for so long, he's decided he, too, needs an entourage, so I've been hired to handle any and all questions and/or attacks that come his way, and to raise his profile here at Outsports and among the general public. Granted, it's a tough job, since I don't know who he is, what his name is, what he looks like, or where he lives. This has led to some of those classic celebrity/lackey showdowns, along the lines of:

UMP: You better get my name in the papers. (Ump bangs fist on table.) I WANT PUBLICITY!!!!!

ME (Fighting back tears of frustration): I can't do that if I don't know your name!!!!

UMP: FIND A WAY, DAMMIT!!!!! (At which point he throws used baseballs at me from behind a screen and tells me I've been "ejected" and that I'm "OUTTA HERE!!!!").

Ump pays me a monthly retainer. He pays by check from an account opened under the name "Ump" at "Ump National Bank." The checks are signed "Ump." The address is given as "Evergreen Terrace" in "Springfield, USA," though I've never been able to determine the state to which he's referring. Doesn't matter, since the checks always bounce. But as Ump's publicist, I try not to let negative information like that get out.

(Ouch, ouch, imagination overheating, must channel creative energies into something more productive.)

[quote]Originally posted by William1865:
Ump doesn't need to give his opinions, because I'm speaking for him. I'm his publicist. You didn't know that?

---

Did I write this? This is really odd.

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: Tarkus ]

geez! what a can of worms I opened up.

anyway, since I was the one that started this line of acerbic debate, let me sort of do an accounting of sorts.

first of all it's interesting to hear references to me being a liberal or a democrat. (implied only. but still... the implication is present) Let me state again for all out there that dismiss anyone disagreeing with them as a "knee jerk liberal" that I am a proud republican. as my dear friend Matt has said, some of my comments/opinions are "right wing crack pot"

having said that.... what William1999 or whomever contends is incorrect. I do not begrudge Ump55's right to assert his political opinion.

what I took umbrage to was that in stating Sen. McCain should "go get his binky and rattle.. shut up already." just because he expressed his disagreement with the W.Bush White House..... He took it out of the arena of intelligent political discourse and made it a personal attack on the character of Sen.McCain.

Should McCain agree with Bush just for the sake of political unity? No.

Ump44 and (I'm sure) William1905 are deeply nestled in the closet afraid to lose their highly prestigious and lucrative positions. these same opinions were iterated many times in eras past and present by attorneys, physicians, executives, etc etc. Have they all lost their positions? Were their fears of a homosexual-work apocalypse true?

That is obviously a sidebar and not the issue at hand as the issue of coming out vs staying closeted has been discussed before.

all I was saying was.... when you, yourself are not able to act with courage and bravery then do not levy a potshot at someone else who has acted and continues to act with courage and bravery for his display of that same courage.

So McCain runs to the media and falsely accuses President Bush of lying. That is "intelligent political discourse"? I'd hate to hear what McCain's personal attacks sound like, though from people who have worked for him I understand they can be pretty blistering.

Oh, and can you tell me where my prestigious and lucrative position is located? I want to get into it as quickly as possible.

[quote]Originally posted by ung:
When you guys can act with as much courage as does Sen. McCain, then you can admonish him to go "get his rattle"

---

WELL ALL RIGHT! Set the thread on fire, you Iberian-loving "faithful Republican" you!

But seriously, I'd broached a similar issue (about the importance of gay rights if you are NOT in the closet) much more circuitously on another thread because I have been embroiled more than once in battles with conservatives on this board, and I'm striving to be more civil. No attacks on Ump or William or anyone else who's not fully out. I will say, as an openly gay progressive-liberal, however, that it does take a hell of a lot of courage to BE OUT in every aspect of your life and challenge the status quo, whether you are on the left, right or center. Communists and socialists, let's not forget, have been as willing as any conservatives else to denounce, humiliate and punish fags and dykes for political gain and warped ideological reasons.

At any rate, I think McCain does have convictions, he's not a nutso, he could easily be a moderate-to-conservative Democrat, and I'm damn glad he's in office today.

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: Tarkus ]

[quote]Originally posted by William1865:
(And for what it's worth, I don't think it is fair to question Ump's honesty and integrity appropos of absolutely nothing, save for some unpopular (at least here, anyway) political beliefs.

---

It would be too obvious if he claimed to be a player or coach. No one (despite Dave Pallone) would suspect that a gay umpire would be a made-up persona. It's obviously a clever manuever on the part of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy.

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: Tarkus ]

[quote]Originally posted by William1865:
Did I write this? This is really odd.

---

If you didn't I'd like to meet whoever did, because I really enjoyed it.

M1 and I would like to say this again.

Do NOT quote huge chunks of text when you are replying to someone. One or two sentences will do. If people want the whole thing, they can scroll up. And if you're replying to something directly above your post, just reply, there's no need to quote it.

Tarkus, President, Moderators For A More Readable Message Board.

That's what all the "Edited by Tarkus" stamps at the bottom of certain messages are about.

Please return to the regularly scheduled partisan mudslinging. Thank you.

I think that this administration is doing their best to subdue and silence virtually all criticism or questioning of their tactics, their methods, and their agendas. McCain is probably one of the few Republicans who we can count on not to be silent. I hope he continues to hold President Bush accountable for his statements and his actions.


As for the rest of the issues that have been raised during this thread: We all have the right to question, debate, argue, discuss whatever we choose ...People who are closeted have every right in the world to run their lives the way they see fit. I would like nothing better than to overcome the anger I sometimes feel when certain posters criticize and strike out at public figures or even other posters over their convictions or integrity (the whole "glass houses" thing). But, it's tough when I know that someone who's closeted, while hardly having it easy and most likely experiencing a great deal of personal anquish at times, doesn't face the challenges and hurdles that any gay person who's out faces on a regular basis. While gay people come in every different shape, size, and political affiliation, my idealistic nature somehow expects that we're all fighting the good fight towards legal equality and the end of prejudice and discrimination. I know that's not quite true but it doesn't mean I won't continue to try and move people in that direction. Mostly, in my adult life as a gay man, I've only experienced and shared support and camraderie with other gay people...that's how it should be as much as possible...

So, let's pretend the family holiday's over and all the fighting is finished....Smile!

[quote]Originally posted by RazorbackTX:
Should I not be able to say that I dont believe he is an umpire?

---

You DO have the right to say it...but do you REALLY believe that he isn't an umpire? Does that mean that you don't believe that I am REALLY a cop?? Or that Gator Jamie isn't from Florida and doesn't REALLY wrestle gators-or that William 1865 isn't from Washington & isn't REALLY a conservative?) WHERE WILL ALL THIS MADNESS END??

[quote]Originally posted by William1865:


Did I write this? This is really odd.

[ December 10, 2002: Message edited by: Tarkus ]

---

Most of what you write is odd!!

[quote]Originally posted by ung:
first of all it's interesting to hear references to me being a liberal or a democrat. (implied only. but still... the implication is present) Let me state again for all out there that dismiss anyone disagreeing with them as a "knee jerk liberal" that I am a proud republican. as my dear friend Matt has said, some of my comments/opinions are "right wing crack pot"

---

Ah, ung is a republican, the plot thickens!!
Keep it up brother!!

William1254,

to reply, I would quote that you were the one to say, "Ump's conviction that keeping a very unique and perhaps even lucrative job open only to a very select number of men is more important at this point in his life than any alleged personal or political satisfaction he may or may not receive by being openly gay"

that was the phrase to which I refer when speaking of "prestigious and lucrative positions". Granted, I have no idea whether the position you yourself hold is prestigious or lucrative. But based on your response, I will assume your vocation/position to be neither. Pity.

What I was expressing was the fact that when justifications for staying in the closet are given, being "out" is almost always equated with loss of income, position and general livelihood. The most noted examples I have heard in cocktail parties during my time on The Hill (as well as my time in school in DC) and elsewhere of this rationale are always those who wish to keep a "certain lifestyle to which they have become accustomed".
I do believe that the contention put forth by both Ump54 and you, WilliamC3PO, for not being out was just that. No matter the personal applicability of said situation to your own lives.

again, I believe everyone has a right to do what one wishes with his life. I am not saying you MUST come out. But I also reserve the right to disagree with your decision to do so. THAT is my right. No inconsistencies there and no infringements of your rights either. Just like I have a right to date a blackman should I choose to do so. Sen. Trent Lott does not have to agree with it. That is his right.

Honestly, I've forgotten what this whole discussion is all about. Something about John McCain's not really an umpire, Ump is mad at President Bush, and Ung wants to date Trent Lott and that's his right as a Republican? I'm all confused.

[quote]Originally posted by William1865:
I'm all confused.

---

We know William, we know.

[quote]Originally posted by RazorbackTX:


We know William, we know.

---

Liberals always take things out of context. The American people are tired of it. Anti-contextualism is tearing our nation apart.