Republican Donors to Meet at Not so Secret LGBT Conference

Paul Singer and Chad Griffin

As noted in prior posts, some wealthy Republican donors see the GOP's anti-gay platform to be a losing approach in the long term and are putting their money behind their efforts to make the GOP more inclusive and to support LGBT candidates.  Like anti-gay churches in America, the GOP's self-prostitution to anti-gay Christofascists is alienating the younger generations even as elderly homophobes die off.  The Washington Blade looks at coming conference between some such Republican donors and LGBT groups.  Here are excerpts:

High-dollar donors seeking to make the Republican Party more LGBT-inclusive are set to gather in D.C. on Thursday for a closed-door conference, according to four sources familiar with the event.

The American Unity Conference is set to begin Thursday morning at the Hay Adams Hotel on H and 16th streets, N.W. It’s hosted by the same pro-LGBT Republican advocates behind the American Unity Fund and the American Unity PAC, related groups that seek to elect pro-LGBT Republican candidates and encourage GOP support for LGBT rights.

Both organizations are funded by Paul Singer, a billionaire hedge fund manager and philanthropist who backs LGBT rights, including same-sex marriage and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. His son, Andrew Singer, is gay.

Although the meeting is confidential and off-the-record, the Washington Blade learned limited details based on information from sources familiar with the conference. The American Unity Fund didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment.

Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign, is set to speak at the event, according to the sources, despite his record as a Democratic operative. HRC didn’t respond to a request for comment.

One source said Griffin’s role is scheduled to be limited to an introduction of Theodore Olson, a former U.S. solicitor general under the Bush administration who was lead counsel in the federal lawsuit against California’s Proposition 8 and pending litigation challenging Virginia’s ban on same-sex marriage.

Americans for Workplace Opportunity, which was set up by Griffin as a collaborative project with other pro-LGBT groups to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, also reportedly took $375,000 from Singer to encourage House members to vote for the bill.

Singer himself is scheduled to deliver remarks at the Hay Adams at 8:30 a.m. to kick off the event, according to one source.

GOP Super PAC Plans Gay-Rights Push This Fall

Paul Singer

While most Republican candidates remain to shamelessly prostituting themselves to the Christofascist/Tea Party elements of the GOP base, some are seeing the long term handwriting on the fall and have begun to take pro-gay rights positions.  Such courage and moral integrity, naturally outrages the hate merchants among the "godly Christian" crowd and puts such gay friendly candidates at risk.  Enter the American Unity PAC and its policy arm, American Unity Fund, with a mission of supporting Republicans who will vote for gay friendly policies ranging from gay marriage to employment non-discrimination protections.  As USA Today reports, American Unity plans on helping finance the campaigns of gay friendly GOP candidates this fall.  Here are story highlights:

A Republican group tied to hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer plans to spend at least $2 million up to Election Day to boost congressional candidates who share its views in favor of gay rights.

American Unity's midterm push comes after a string of recent victories, including little-noticed state contests in Illinois, Nevada, Minnesota and Hawaii, where it helped Republican candidates — vulnerable over gay-marriage votes — survive primary challenges.

The group has drawn up plans to back seven congressional candidates ahead of November's elections and could add more to the roster, said Jeff Cook-McCormac, a senior adviser to American Unity PAC and its policy arm, American Unity Fund. They include incumbents such as Pennsylvania Rep. Charlie Dent, a moderate Republican who announced his support for gay marriage in May and Richard Tisei, an openly gay Republican making his second bid for a U.S. House seat in Massachusetts.

The super PAC already has spent $700,000 in a congressional primary this year to help Republican Rep. Richard Hanna beat back a Tea Party-backed challenger in upstate New York. Hanna, a two-term incumbent, backs a federal bill to ban workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation.

For many years, there's been a huge fear from Republican elected officials that if they showed courage on issues like this, would they be able to survive politically?" Cook-McCormac said.

"What American Unity PAC is committed to doing is ensuring that as these courageous elected officials follow their conscience and do the right thing, that there is a political network in place that's there to defend them."

In all, the group has raised nearly $9 million through its three branches — a super PAC, the tax-exempt arm focused on policy issues and a third group that organizes donors to support candidates.

Singer, the founder of Elliott Management and a leading force in Republican efforts to legalize gay marriage, is the largest donor to the American Unity super PAC at nearly $2 million, federal records show. Another billionaire, Boston investment manager Seth Klarman, has donated $ 1 million.

American Unity's strategy varies by contest. In Illinois and Minnesota this year, it helped launch state-focused super PACs to back like-minded Republicans in primaries. In other states, it has encouraged its network of donors to send campaign checks directly to at-risk candidates.

The Changing Boundaries of Gay Rights

Paul Singer

The world is changing despite the efforts of many in the Republican Party to drag America back to some of the worse abuses and callousness of the Gilded Age.  One only need look at GOP efforts to slash the social safety net for the less fortunate, allow large corporations to run amok without consequences, disenfranchise minority voters, and fuel soaring wealth disparities to see it happening.  But no all Republicans are intent on going back to a time when there was less equality and gays in particularly were - when not openly criminalized - supposed to stay not only inferior but invisible.  A column in the New York Times looks at the efforts of billionaire Paul Singer to force the GOP to pick up the gay rights banner.  Here are column excerpts:

[Paul Singer] was announcing a new project to be funded, at least at the outset, by him and other conservative donors but to be run by the Human Rights Campaign, an L.G.B.T. advocacy group in Washington, which is much more closely affiliated with Democrats. The initiative will be dedicated to fighting the victimization of gays and lesbians internationally. But it will also show that there are Republicans — not a majority, but an increasingly impassioned minority — who are intent on progress and justice for L.G.B.T. people. They won’t surrender that cause to Democrats, and they believe that Republicans who do so are resisting a future that’s both just and inevitable.

“Unless America engages in a terrible, terrible retreat from freedom, towards fascism, communism, whatever — some totalitarian harsh state — this seems inexorable,” Singer told me, meaning equal rights, including the spread of gay marriage, for which he has campaigned with particular energy.

Although Singer declined to discuss specific conversations with individual politicians, other Republicans have told me that he is close to, and has discussed gay rights with, Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, who recently backed off a legal challenge to gay marriage in that state, which became the 14th in which gays and lesbians can legally wed. 

I’ve also been told that Singer has had such talks with Senator Rob Portman, the Ohio Republican who came out for gay marriage, citing his love for his gay son. Singer also has a gay son — and a gay son-in-law. The two men are married. 

His vision of how Republicans must evolve was echoed in a subsequent conversation that I had with Daniel Loeb, another New York hedge-fund billionaire who has given lavishly to conservatives. Loeb is Singer’s principal financial partner in the H.R.C. international project; Singer has already committed $1.5 million, and Loeb has promised a similar amount over its first years.

When I asked Loeb if opposition to gay rights would increasingly hurt Republicans in elections, he said: “Absolutely. It’s where the country’s gone, and if they don’t go with it, they’ll lose a very important demographic. They already have lost some young people.” Surveys show that more than 70 percent of Americans under 30 favor marriage equality.

All of the 55 senators in the Democratic majority have endorsed it, as have four Republicans, excluding Portman, who appears to be leaning that way. His vote would give supporters the 60 they need to overcome a filibuster. 

BUT the bill’s odds aren’t great in the House, whose Republican majority is more conservative on gay rights than the Republican electorate nationally seems to be.

[T]o appeal on a national level to independent voters, young voters and minorities, the party badly needs to amend its ossifying image as an archaic refuge for scolds at odds with modernity itself. An embrace of gay rights, even a partial one, is a great place to start. It could give Republicans a chance to stanch some of the bleeding from the federal shutdown and from continuing rifts over immigration. 

[T]he international initiative has a fascinating wrinkle. In addition to training L.G.B.T. advocates outside the United States and publicizing the failings of especially repressive countries, it intends to name and shame American religious zealots who sponsor antigay campaigns abroad. So Republican money may wind up challenging a constituency within the party. (We’re most definitely not in Kansas anymore.)

In Singer’s view, gay rights are consistent with a Republican philosophy of individual liberty, and gay marriage is “an augmenter of social stability, family stability and stability in raising kids.” In other words, it’s conservative. 

All in all, he has pumped more than $17 million of his own money over the last decade or so into gay rights. And he privately tells Republicans leaning toward pro-equality positions that if they face fire from antigay groups, he’ll help them round up retaliatory funds.

More on GOP Donor Paul Singer's Pro-Gay Super PAC

I've noted before the pro-gay donations and advocacy of billionaire Paul Singer who has established a super PAC to push for marriage equality.  Singer played a large role in pressuring Republicans in New York State to vote for marriage equality in 2011.  Now, Singer is going to use PAC funds to push some GOP congressional members to get on the pro-gay bandwagon.  Unlike many in the GOP, Singer sees the Party's anti-gay positions to be long term suicide.  Thus, he wants to push back against the Christofascist elements in the GOP.  Here are highlights from Politico:

The super PAC created by one of the Republican Party’s most prominent donors to move candidates toward backing gay marriage is about to invest in its first three House races, POLITICO has learned.

American Unity PAC, launched by Elliott Associates hedge fund executive Paul Singer earlier this summer with a $1 million donation, is poised to advertise in the races being fought by Reps. Mary Bono Mack (R-Calif.), Richard Hanna (R-N.Y.) and Judy Biggert (R-Ill.). While none of the three candidates has stated a clear position on gay marriage — only one GOP House member supports it — the group hopes to move the people it backs toward support of it.

A source familiar with the effort said that the group’s aim is to ensure “a counterbalance on the right,” adding that for “the long-term success of the [Republican] party, it must be able to reach gay and lesbian Americans and “the millions of Americans who are related to them.”

The PAC initially decided to enter these three races, the source said, because the incumbents are rank-and-file Republicans with a mixture of economic and tax records the group considers strong, but who also have been solid on specific gay rights issues.

The goal is for the group to spend money to benefit three to seven candidates overall, and this is the initial round. Super PAC support traditionally takes the form of ads.

The major contributors to the PAC, aside from Singer, are financier Cliff Asness, who gave$100,000, Dan Loeb, who gave $250,000, and Seth Klarman, who also gave $250,000. Asness and Loeb played a role in Singer’s efforts to fund the push for New York’s successful gay marriage legislation in 2011.

For Singer, this is a major undertaking for a donor who has become one of the single biggest givers in recent years. The Manhattan Institute chairman’s goal is to move the GOP toward support for same-sex marriage, beginning with his statewide efforts in New York.

This is first move Singer has made at the federal level. Among the goals of American Unity PAC, in terms of how it spends its money, is to offer financial support for candidates who could face a backlash if they speak out for gay marriage.

Singer is also involved in an effort with Loeb, Asness and former Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman to help fund the pro-gay marriage efforts that are part of state-based ballot initiatives this year.

I'm sure Maggie Gallagher and Tony Perkins will be acting as if someone peed in their Cheerios once they get wind of this.  Especially since Singer and his allies have LOTS of money.  And with a gay son, this is personal for Singer, so these developments bode well for the pro-gay forces.

Top Tier Republican Fundraiser Launches Pro-Gay Marriage PAC

Heads must be exploding amongst the gay-hating Christianists who have heretofore pulled the puppet strings for much of the Republican Party.  Paul E. Singer (pictured at right), 67, a billionaire hedge fund manager who is among the most important Republican donors nationwide, has launched a pro-gay marriage PAC.  Although straight himself, Singer has a gay son who has married his partner.  Can you imagine the batshit crazy ravings that will be issuing from the lips of Tony Perkins, Bryan Fischer and the bovine Maggie Gallagher?  One will need full foul weather gear to be protected from the eruptions of spittle that must be flying in the Kool-Aid drinking Christianist circles.  Personally, I LOVE it.  And as more gays come out, more deep pocket political contributors are likely to be siding with their children and across the board civil equality.  I hope Mitt Romney is paying attention.  Here are highlights from a column in the New York Times that looks at the development: 

OVER the past year, the main story line in the push for marriage equality has been the ardor and success with which leading Democratic politicians have taken up the fight. The Democratic governors of New York, Maryland and Washington all promoted and signed same-sex marriage laws, for which President Obama expressed his support last month. 

But the progress within Republican ranks has also been pivotal, not to mention fascinating. And a compelling character in that subplot just added a new twist to the narrative, one that suggests the rapidly changing political dynamics of this issue and its potential import to a party dogged by an image of being culturally out of touch. 

That character is Paul E. Singer, 67, a billionaire hedge fund manager who is among the most important Republican donors nationwide. In just one Manhattan fund-raiser last month, he helped to collect more than $5 million for Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign. 

He steadfastly supports conservative candidates. He also steadfastly supports gay rights in general and marriage equality in particular. Along with a few other leading Wall Street financiers, he contributed and helped drum up the majority of the money — more than $1 million — that fueled the campaign for same-sex marriage in New York. 

He has given nearly $10 million of his own money to gay-rights initiatives, including the same-sex marriage efforts not only in New York but also in New Hampshire and New Jersey. And that figure doesn’t include his assistance in tapping a broad network of donors for individual candidates. He was pivotal in rounding up about $250,000 apiece for the Republican state senators in New York whose votes for same-sex marriage provided its margin of victory in the Legislature. 

Now, Singer says, he’s providing $1 million to start a new “super PAC” with several Republican compatriots. Named American Unity PAC, its sole mission will be to encourage Republican candidates to support same-sex marriage, in part by helping them to feel financially shielded from any blowback from well-funded groups that oppose it. 

In an interview on Tuesday, he told me that he’s confident that in Congressional races, which would most likely be the super PAC’s initial focus, there are more than a few Republicans “who could be on the verge of support” or are “harboring and hiding their views.”  “And this kind of effort could be catalytic in generating some more movement,” he said.

Although he is straight, he has a gay son and son-in-law who were married in Massachusetts, which legalized same-sex marriage in 2004.  

Our conversation also reflected a growing awareness among prominent Republicans that embracing marriage equality could broaden the party’s base and soften the party’s image in crucial ways.  .  .   .  .  “There’s a feeling among some people that the Republican party is harsh on some things,” acknowledged Singer, whose extended comments can be found in a blog post supplementing this column.

In a CNN/ORC International poll released Wednesday, a whopping 73 percent of respondents between the ages of 18 and 34 said they favored marriage equality. That’s the clear future of this issue, and Republicans are keenly aware that while the party’s formal opposition to abortion rights, for example, doesn’t contradict the prevailing sentiments of a majority of Americans or buck voter trends, opposition to same-sex marriage does. 

Singer said that it [same sex marriage] “very well fits within my framework of freedom,” adding that it promotes “family stability” and is a tribute to an institution in need of one. “Obviously, the institution of marriage in America has utterly collapsed,” he said. That gay and lesbian couples nonetheless want to wed “is kind of a lovely thing and a cool thing and a wonderful thing,” he added.

Singer’s super PAC, which, according to Singer, will soon have a budget “of a few million dollars,” factoring in expected support from collaborators and friends. .  .  .  .  he said, adding that with continued work on marriage equality, he expects to persuade more Republicans of its rightness, too. 

Again, the Christofascists will be beside themselves.  But money talks and the strong support for gay marriage among younger voters who will be replacing reactionary elderly voters as they die off makes the hand writing pretty clear for anyone who isn't a Kool-Aid drinker: change or die.

Money (and GOP Deep Pockets) Were Key in New York Victory

UPDATED: A Quinnipiac University poll released Tuesday (i.e., yesterday) shows New York State voters support 54% – 40% a law allowing same-sex couples to marry, with voters under 35 supporting the measure 70% – 26%. Voters 35 to 64 years old also support the measure, while voters over 65 oppose it 57%– 37%. The hugely lopsided support of younger voters further underscores the fact that the GOP's anti-gay agenda represents long term political suicide.
*
Sam Stein has a column in the Huffington Post that looks at the financial dynamic that was involved in the marriage equality victory in New York State. Yes, Andrew Cuomo's leadership on the issue - which was starkly different than that of Barack Obama, the Follower in Chief's on LGBT issues - played a huge part. But to seal the deal, Cuomo needed money and in part he got the funds from powerful Republican donors who could intimidate and cajole the feint of heart among the GOP senators. While New York is perhaps a unique situation, the message to Democrats is that they should no longer expect members of the LGBT community to automatically vote for Democrats out of a knee jerk reaction. At least not in progressive states (Virginia sadly remains decades from such a situation since the Republican Party of Virginia remains so beholden to the Christian Right that it's a wonder it doesn't suffocate from the brown nosing). Here are highlights from Stein's column:
*
The passage of historic legislation legalizing same sex marriage in the state of New York last Friday was owed in large part to a compelling political motivator: money.
*
Although New York's legislators were already disposed to approving gay marriage because of the more progressive disposition of the state and a major grassroots campaign in support of the bill, LGBT activists from both parties turned to a simple, poignant argument: Lawmakers not only stood to gain the support of well-funded gay-rights supporters if they backed the bill, they would suffer if they opposed it or shied away from the spotlight.
*
The politics of gay rights have grown complex in a very short period of time. Once shunned by both parties, only to be picked up as a cause by more progressive-minded Democrats, LGBT issues no longer break down cleanly among the party lines.
*
Increasingly, a cadre of deep-pocketed Republican donors is joining in the charge. And the enticements they are using to sway lawmakers are not just conservative arguments for civil liberties or public opinion polls that show a generational divide on gay rights, but the promise of contributions or other forms of political support.
*
Some of the biggest donors in the Republican Party were bankrollers of the gay marriage push in New York and, presumably, would write checks for candidates elsewhere who back their worldview. As The New York Times reported, several weeks before the crucial vote, Gov. Andrew Cuomo's most trusted advisers met with "a group of super-rich Republican donors," successfully convincing them to "win over the deciding Senate Republicans." Attendees included Paul Singer, whose son is gay, and hedge fund managers Cliff Asness and Dan Loeb. . . . . . Steven Cohen a hedge fund manager and the founder of SAC Capital, also was persuaded to lend his clout to the campaign.
*
Last year, the American Foundation for Equal Rights held a major event featuring Singer, Mehlman, and Peter Thiel, the gay billionaire who was an original investor in both PayPal and Facebook. It also included a host of famous [GOP] politicos, like former Gov. William Weld, Environmental Protection Agency head Christie Todd Whitman and Republican operatives Nicole Wallace and Alex Castellanos. The event provided an early illustration of the type of donor base that was available for the right-minded candidate.
*
The big time Republican funders, likewise, would make calls of reassurance where need be as would Ted Olson, the Bush v. Gore lawyer who has since played a leading role in arguing the constitutionality of same sex marriage.
*
And then there was the governor's office. "Cuomo was able to convince people -- both Democrats and Republicans -- that they were more likely to get reelected if they supported marriage equality than if they didn't," said Richard Socarides, of gay rights organization Equality Matters and the chief aide on LGBT issues in the Clinton White House. "The right-wing threatened these guys and the Catholic Church threatened them."
*
"Wall Street interests who supported marriage equality were an important counter to that," he said. "So yes, money played a role."
*
In the end, all the money, pressure, behind the scenes lobbying and in front of the cameras advocacy was enough to convince four of 32 state senate Republicans to cast yes votes. That was enough. But in the wake of its passage -- with all the euphoric talk of history's arch and a Cuomo run for the White House at 2016 -- strategy decisions once again revolved around cash.
*
"Right now, agenda item number one is making sure that those four courageous Republicans who voted yes are protected," New York Log Cabin Republicans Chairman Gregory T. Angelo told HuffPost's Matt Sledge.

Huntsman Steps Into the Republican Presidential Candidate Vacuum

I have mentioned former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman because in my view he's just about the only sane presidential contender. The question is whether he has a snowball's chance in Hell of securing the GOP nomination given the extremism and outright insanity of today's GOP base. Jonathan Capehart at the Washington Post finds him an intriguing candidate - as do a number of those individuals who go by the oxymoron term "gay Republicans" as discussed by Politico. As several news outlets have reported, when asked about the possible passage of marriage equality in New York State, Huntsman indicated that he'd respect the state's decision. Obviously, such a statement plays well with moderates and progressives but must have set many in the GOP base into convulsions. Here are highlights from Capehart's column:
*
Former Utah governor Jon Huntsman is getting into the race today for the Republican nomination for president, and I’m glad for it. Of all the candidates in the field, he’s the one I find most intriguing, for a couple of reasons.
*
For the folks looking for a GOP alternative to former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, Huntsman could fill the bill. They both look presidential and have families to match. They’re both smart and have substantial records to run on (and away from) in an appeal to voters. But there are two things that make Huntsman stand out and more promising to me. First, his stances on issues appear to be more firm than Romney’s.
*
Second, Huntsman is willing to stand by positions he’s taken that very well could hurt him with the Republican Party faithful.
*
It is that willingness to be unabashedly moderate in a party that has swung far to the right that makes Huntsman so appealing to me. And to many Republicans. GOP strategist Mark McKinnon, an adviser to 2008 presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), said on “Morning Joe” today that he doesn’t think Huntsman is too moderate for the party. A nomination fight with Huntsman in it will be “a fight for the heart and soul of the Republican Party.”
*
As for the Politico coverage, note is taken to Huntsman's support for same sex civil unions. While I find civil unions to be too little and a case of "separate but equal" bullshit, Huntsman is the only GOP contender who has the balls to take the position. Here are highlights from Politico:
*
[A] consultant for the campaign is fundraising off his support for civil unions. The email from Charles T. Moran, a vice chair with the California Log Cabin Republicans and a political consultant, highlights Huntsman and his wife Mary Kaye's support for the LGBT community, adding as Utah's governor he's "talked the talk and walked the walk," and is "unique in his desire to have a fully inclusive campaign."
*
Huntsman doesn't support gay marriage, but was considered to be a fairly pro-gay rights governor, including on issues like hospital visitation. He's also not making much of an overt play for social conservatives - most notably bypassing Iowa,
*
Polling has indicated that voters nationally have moved on the subject of gay marriage, but it remains a potentially complicated issue in a Republican primary. And it is unusual to see an official fundraising appeal that highlights a national candidate's favorable stand on gay rights.
*
I don't know if I could support Huntsman or not. But it would be nice to have a president who might actually be willing to be a leader rather than a timid follower like Obama has been throughout most of his time in the White House.

GOP House of Delegates Contender Embraces Gay-Rights Positions

I am sure that this story will get the Christo-fascists at The Family Foundation ("TFF") hopping mad and cause its executive director, Victoria Cobb, to start foaming at the mouth and convulsing on the floor. A GOP candidate for the Virginia House of Delegates has - oh the horror - taken a pro-gay rights stand on several issues that are an obsession with TFF. Republican Eric Brescia is running for a district in Arlington, Virginia, historically one of the most progressive areas in the state, so an anti-gay position would not be well received by the voters of that demographically diverse district. This obviously partially explains his positions. However, what I find really interesting is that Brescia says that his pro-gay positions are in keeping with true Republican principles. And you know what? As a member of the GOP in its days before the Christianists took over the party, Republican principles of that time would support a pro-gay rights mindset. Here are some highlights from the Sun Gazette:

*

A candidate for office in Arlington who wants to get rid of the state constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, eliminate the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy and allow the county government to give domestic-partner benefits to unmarried members of the government workforce?Sounds like it’s pretty standard stuff for a Democrat. But coming from a Republican, it might raise some eyebrows.

*

And yet that’s where Republican Eric Brescia stands. Brescia, seeking to succeed retiring Democratic Del. Albert Eisenberg, has made gay rights a theme prominent enough in his campaign to be featured, if in generalities only, on his Web site. “If I’m elected, I will actively fight for full equality under the law for gays and lesbians,” Brescia told the Sun Gazette.

*

“Religious organizations should continue to be free to recognize marriages according to their own teachings, but the principles of separation of church and state and equality under the law demand that we allow consenting adults, whether gay or straight, to enter into civil marriage,” he said.

*

Brescia, an economist who was drafted to run earlier this year, said he supports ending prohibitions on service in the military by openly gay individuals; supports adding sexual orientation to protected classes in Virginia’s hate-crimes and fair-housing rules; and supports allowing local governments in Virginia to give certain benefits to unmarried partners of government workers, something Arlington officials have been seeking since 1997. Brescia said it all boils down to basic Republican core values. “I’m a Republican because I believe in individual freedom, the right to contract and equality under the law,” he said.

*

Both contenders not only find themselves to the left of Republican gubernatorial candidate Robert McDonnell on the issue, but also to the left of Democratic gubernatorial candidate Creigh Deeds, who relatively consistently opposed gay-rights measures when they came before the state Senate. That doesn’t concern Mark Kelly, chairman of the Arlington County Republican Committee.“Eric’s candidacy has been met with enthusiasm by Arlington Republicans, even though some may differ with him on some of the issues,” Kelly said.

*

The Arlington Gay and Lesbian Alliance (AGLA) hadn’t been aware of Brescia’s positions until queried by the media, but the organization’s president said she was pleased to hear of them. Beth Kozlow said AGLA planned an October candidate forum in which Brescia, Hope and Ruebner - plus candidates for other offices - could lay out their positions on issues of concern to the local gay and lesbian community. Kozlow said it is a savvy move on Brescia’s part to stake out inclusive positions on issues of importance to the gay community.“If he wants to appeal to where Arlington County is on this issue, it’s a wise position to take, [and] not entirely surprising,” she said.

*

The reality is that as the older homophobic generations die off, to win elections politicians will have to face the fact that younger generations of voters favor gay equality. Thus, it will be a case of changing with society or getting defeated at the polls. True, this change will take far longer to occur in backwards areas of Virginia such as Martinsville and backwaters in the far southwest of the state. Nonetheless, the change WILL come eventually.