At first, the revelation by the Miami New Times that celebrity homophobe George Rekers enjoys traveling overseas with Rentboy 'escorts' seemed a fairly self-contained scandal. It was bad publicity for the Family Research Council for sure, but it was a Ted Haggard-type scandal, the type late night comics love, but one whose direct reach into politics seemed to be limited to adding another name to a list of anti-gay hypocrites. It ruins Rekers, but he isn't an elected official, even a well-known name to those who casually follow politics.
But since the revelation Bill McCollum fought to hire Rekers as a state expert to defend a gay adoption ban, Alex Sink and the Florida Democratic Party have used this issue to direct conversation in the gubernatorial race. Sink has trailed McCollum in polls and clearly sees an opportunity to exploit this case.
She is probably right to do so, but I worry about the underlying message of this attack. At its heart, I suppose, is that McCollum hired a hypocrite with tax payer money to defend the state, and that now leaves us with a bit of a black eye. But I think all parties need to be careful not to turn into hypocritical homophobes themselves.
McCollum wants to distance himself from Rekers now, but he hasn't handled the affair artfully thus far. But the deeper question I want asked of the AG is why he felt the need to fight gays adopting in the first place in a state bereft of horror stories from the foster system. Obviously, the office needs to defend the laws of the state of Florida, just as the White House has defended the constitutionality of DODA despite a difference in statutory opinion. But to bring in experts so closely affiliated with anti-gay political movements seemed a poor choice from the get-go. In my opinion, it is far more troubling to think McCollum hired an expert who has historically demeaned homosexuality as an ailment than to think McCollum hired a closeted homosexual. But then, nobody expects Republicans to suddenly be gay-friendly, and McCollum has to prove he isn't a "darling of the homosexual extremists."
For Sink, things are more delicate. One has to raise the question, 'Why is Sink suddenly interested in Rekers?' On the Bubba the Love Sponge show, she accused McCollum of trying to sweep Rekers under the rug. But what exactly is there to sweep? She needs to be careful not to suggest that Rekers is not a credible person because he may be gay. The focus needs to be on why McCollum would go out of his way to bring such hateful testimony forward on the part of the state. I think that means Sink must be prepared to come forward firmly in support of gay adoption, and she needs to firmly fight any other infringements on gay rights.
My fear is that she will go after the cheap points on Rekers and risk damaging and alienating homosexuals short term, and that will hurt her with all progressives. This banker-turned-pol still needs to convince people she can clean up government for the good, and I am not sure taking swipes at this easy target will help.
That said, McCollum seems to have screwed up so badly on this, it can only hurt him. I just hope gay rights don't suffer, especially considering this is rooted in an attack on gay rights for which McCollum is responsible.
No comments:
Post a Comment