blog advertising is good for you

Blogroll


Favorites

 Instapundit
FrontPageMag.Com
Michelle Malkin
Now!Hampshire
Lucianne.com
The Corner
Weekend Pundit

NH Conservative Bloggers

 Atlantic Ave
Bogieblog
Citizens for Reasonable&Fair Taxes-
                   Croyden
ConChrist (Lori Ingham)
Drew Cline
COTErack
Ed Mosca
GilfordGrok
Granite State Pundit
Moultonboro Speaks
NH Commentary
NH Election
NH Insider
NH Watchdog
No Looking Backwards
One Voice In Gilford
Politizine
Pun Salad
Radioactive Liberty
Rob Boyce Blog
Take Back Orford, NH
The Blogging Councilor
Weekend Pundit

Local News

The Citizen (Lakes Region)
The Laconia Daily Sun
The Gilford Steamer
The Union Leader
The Concord Monitor
The Nashua Telegraph

Think Tanks

Josiah Bartlett Center for Public
                     Policy
NH Watchdog
Cornerstone Policy Research
Heritage Foundation

Activists

 Bow Citizens Coalition
Coalition of NH Taxpayers
Moultonborough Citizens Alliance
State Sunshine and Open Records
Wiki for Freedom of Information Act
Sunshine Review
BallotPedia

Friend or Foe?

 RedHampshire
Blue Hampshire

Sam Adams Alliance blogs

Free Market, Limited Govt

 Sam Adams Alliance blogs


News

BlogNetNews for NH
CNSNews
Drudge Report
WorldNetDaily
Snopes
RefDesk

Islamic World

 Dhimmi Watch
Jihad Watch
MEMRI

Pure Politics

 Real Clear Politics
Red State

MilBlogs

 Blackfive
Defense Tech
Sgt Stryker
OpFor
Strategy Page
Michael Yon Online Magazine
Mudville Gazette

Environmentalism (or not)

Junk Science

Geeky Stuff

 Geek Press
Slashdot

Education

 F.I.R.E.
Joanne Jacobs
Thomas Fordham Foundation
EIA Intercepts
Core Knowledge

Blog Commentaries

 Austin Bay
Babalu Blog
Belmont Club
Betsy's Page
Conservative Grapevine
Contentions
Eye on the UN
Hugh Hewitt
Overlawyered
Mark Steyn
Neal Boortz
TCS Daily
Townhall.com
Power Line
Right Wing News
NewsBusters

Radio and TV Shows

 Howie Carr
Mark Levin
The Rush Limbaugh Show

Design - Architecture - Stuff

 Engadget
Gizmodo
Inhabitat
Uncrate

Humor

 DILBERT BLOG


« A Real Dumb Thing, he did | Main | Mafia-style health insurance" - courtesy of Your Government »

Statement by Doug Lambert

As to the events of the last couple of days, I would again refer to my original statement:

CLICK HERE FOR STATEMENT

Since the time I issued that, I have spoken to the several media that I was able to receive their calls. I have taken an honest and contrite approach to my actions and the resulting consequences, and have been as open and frank as I can possibly be. There is nothing that can “unring the bell” so to speak, and all I can do is stand by my apology and continue to ask for forgiveness.

For those who do not know, I no longer have my position as the Thursday columnist at the Laconia Daily Sun, and, understandably, Meet the New Press radio has been axed by Nassau Broadcasting as well. I believe that these are the proper and appropriate consequences, and I apologize to the good people at the paper and the radio station who have been wonderful to me over the years and were completely undeserving of the grief my actions have caused them.

Additionally, I will no longer write at GraniteGrok for an as yet undetermined amount of time. I plan on spending my time in prayer and reflection, looking inward to the unhealthy malice in my heart, for which I will ultimately have to face my Maker , begging for His undeserved mercy.

One last point-- and then I ask for peace and privacy in this matter. In addition to those listed in my original apology statement, I owe my great friend Skip Murphy the most sincerest of apologies for all that has resulted from my inexcusable actions. Through no fault of his, all that has been built with great effort and heartache is now mostly all gone. In an instant. Like that…

Let this be a lesson to those who harbor such hatred as I have demonstrated—think about it. We must love EVERYBODY as we do ourselves.  And all the world is a camera. There is no hiding anymore.

I engaged in a WHOLE lot of free speech around here. With that, comes responsibility. Use it wisely.


 

Posted by Doug on November 16, 2009 8:30 PM |

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://granitegrok.com/blog-mt/mt-tb.cgi/4466

Comments

I do believe your sincerity when it comes to the grief you have caused those who hosted your programme...Those who worked with you, believed in you, were your friends. Still, I am left wondering if this heart-felt remorse extends to the gay community left reeling from your actions. I would hope so... A printed public apology in the Union Leader is called for too. Best ---The TaxiMan

Posted by: TaxiManSteve | November 16, 2009 9:28 PM

From life, from mistakes, from successes, from our friends, and even from those who are not, we learn and grow. What we did yesterday isn't as important as what we do tomorrow. Those of us who are gay have grown up in a world that, fortunately, day by day is changing for the better. But it has been a tough ride, and continues to be. Hate and discrimination is yielding, little by little, to love and equality. Perhaps, in a way, this entire incident has made us understand one another just a little more. Good comes from unexpected sources.

Posted by: Jim Splaine | November 16, 2009 9:33 PM

Thanks, Doug, for writing something which sounds more like an actual apology. Skip was wise not to allow comments in his very bigoted defense of you. What you did was not "dumb"-- as you properly say here, it was hateful. Neither Skip nor you think gay people deserve to be treated as human. If you did, you would not work to make sure we do not the same rights you do. If Skip did not agree with the substance of your comments, he would consider that people have a right to legitimate anger when you call them faggots and wish them dead. He would have offered his own apology, not gone out of his way to take yours back.

Posted by: Landon Bryce | November 16, 2009 9:41 PM

Thanks Jim.

Posted by: doug | November 16, 2009 10:04 PM

What a piece of shit you are. The right wing haters, including your fat ass, influence in this country is coming to an end. May you live the rest of your life in obscurity where you belonged from the start. William Solis

Posted by: William Solis | November 16, 2009 10:05 PM

Wow Is this Vermont or New Hampshire ??? Get a life people. Live free or die ? What a joke. Doug, quit apologizing you've done a lot more for your community than these "citizens" can take down in a week. 99 % of the people commenting on your remarks would never even vote not to mention try to make a difference like you have (by your record not by one comment) Steve Hamel Your friend from RI NOT hidden

Posted by: Steve Hamel | November 16, 2009 10:31 PM

Dear William It is people like Doug who are trying to make the US a better place and have it not end up like a 3rd world country. People like you are the reason that the country is going down the drain.

Posted by: Joseph | November 16, 2009 11:07 PM

Taximan, A bit dramatic aren't we? "left reeling from your actions" Let's face it, Doug could write a letter to the UL and every paper in the country and it still wouldn't be enough for some people. But, Buckley will NEVER apologize for the many worse things he's said and done now will he?...nor will you post a note saying that he should either. Doug has paid a very severe price and it's time to move on for heaven's sake. Try being a grown up like Jim did.

Posted by: judy | November 17, 2009 3:50 AM

Judy: What exactly do you think Buckley has done that is worse than calling someone a faggot and wishing him dead? People keep repeating this idea, but what has Buckley ever said or done that approaches this level of hatefulness?

Posted by: Landon Bryce | November 17, 2009 7:40 AM

This is the answer to Landon Bryce's last question. And there's more that I haven't posted just because I didn't want it to turn into a hate-fest against me personally.

Posted by: Lori Ingham (ConChrist) | November 17, 2009 7:48 AM

I echo my comments from the post on Doug's statement earlier... The folks like William above need to get a life and move on. I agree with the sentiment in Doug's note here that his comments were hateful and no matter who is the attacker or on the attack, hateful comments are wrong. I guess the people like William are so mad, so afraid that they aren't pushing their agenda as fast as they like that they have to revert to far worse statements. When will the Tolerance police see the humor (and error) in their own hateful, hurtful vitriol all in the name of "tolerance" (their own brand, a tolerance where if we don't endorse, embrace and love whatever ideology it is they are pushing we are ravenously attacked.. Look at some of the actions on the "tolerance" side of the Prop 8 debate... Death threats, urine thrown at church members, grotesque words thrown, etc.) I am not saying I excuse Doug's comments. I do believe in Forgiveness (because I have received such forgiveness myself 8 years ago when I accepted Christ as savior and agreed that I was a sinner and that His death was the only way for me to receive forgiveness and heaven) and I do believe Doug is sincere in his apology. To the folks like Landon, I have never heard anything said by Doug or Skip that indicate anyone doesn't deserve to be treated like a human. The marriage debate has nothing to do with basic human rights. Before you call someone a hate filled bigot because they disagree with your view and lifestyle perhaps you should think of the implications. I believe the moment you break down into name calling (on either side) you kind of lose the ability to claim a moral high ground. You also, in my mind, kind of lose the ability to whine about being called names. So perhaps this lesson that Doug just learned the hard way can be a lesson for folks on both sides of passionate issues - Take it personal, take the debate off of facts and logic and you lose the ability to have a rational discussion. You have sunk to a level of anger and hate and then all bets are off. Doug - I stand beside you and am praying for the apologies, pleas for forgiveness and double firings to be the end of the intense hate heading in your direction. I agree with most everything you said in this post.

Posted by: Mike Walsh | November 17, 2009 7:51 AM

I read about this story in today's Union Leader. I'm disappointed in you Doug. There's plenty to disagree with Ray Buckley about without getting into his sexuality or otherwise displaying any kind of nastiness based on sexual orientation. Believe it or not, Doug, there are gays that lean to the right politically on some issues including guns, taxes, small government, etc. By behaving the way that you did you may have pushed some of us into voting for your political opponents in the next election. And even worse, you created sympathy for Ray Buckley! Do not be foolish enough to think that Ray Buckley is universally loved by all gays in New Hampshire. And yet, through your actions, you created a wave of sympathy for him while simultaneously discrediting your own political ideology and agenda. Skip, your "defense" of Doug also sucked because you blatantly tried to deflect the issue onto political correctness. PC has nothing to do with any of this. Your post made you look less than gracious and you probably made Doug's situation even worse. Please think before you post again. I hope you guys can ultimately get over the homophobic nastiness and focus on important issues like guns, taxes and small government. If you can't then be aware that each time you come across as anti-gay you are creating votes for Ray Buckley and his party. Is that what you really want? Seriously, think about it.

Posted by: Jim | November 17, 2009 7:57 AM

Doug I second Jim Splaine's sentiments. Most of us in the Blogoshere ( Jim is the great exception) have been driven at times by anger and resentment. It seems to go with the territory. I try to keep it to the level of semi-humourous snar, but have written many things I wish I could take back. Resentment is at the heart of all of this and resentment is poisionous. It is dividing us. So reflect and come back. Perhaps something bigger than all of us will come out of this. I wish you the best.

Posted by: Chaz Proulx | November 17, 2009 10:00 AM

Your prior apology? Not so good. This one? Much, much better. Congratulations; you have seen as others see. > Let this be a lesson to those who harbor such hatred as I have demonstrated—think about it. We must love EVERYBODY as we do ourselves. Welcome to humanity. You have set yourself a difficult but necessary and rewarding task. And after the time it takes to integrate this understanding into your beliefs and value system, I will be interested to hear how it affects your political inclinations.

Posted by: TTG | November 17, 2009 10:17 AM

Mike Walsh does not think calling someone a faggot and saying you hope a gay man dies soon is treating gays as subhuman. Mike, Doug said that a gay, black performer should should choke to death on a chicken bone or a piece of watermelon. It is a statement of fact to call him a hate-filled bigot, isn't it? Or, at the very least, a legitmate interpretation of his actions? Lori Ingham thinks the word "faggot" is equal to the word "thug." She also things a death wish is equal to an expression of solidarity ("we've all lost things.") I think most people probably would not agree. Can anyone point to anything Ray Buckley has done that actually approaches Doug Lambert's level of offensiveness?

Posted by: Landon Bryce | November 17, 2009 10:57 AM

Landon, "level of hatefulness" is in the eye of the beholder...just call me part of what Buckley calls the "unhinged mob" if you like. Apparently Lori already answered your question and many of us could go on and on with more, but I agree with Lori and I don't want this turned into a hate-fest against me either.

Posted by: judy paris | November 17, 2009 11:14 AM

You think someone calling someone's son a "thing" is showing "solidarity?" You need more help than what I can give you. And apparently you didn't watch the accompanying video. Any of those things would have gotten anyone else in serious trouble. And I have a bigger issue with the fact that Buckley, even knowing the connotation of the term "teabagger", still uses the term in public. And I'm still trying to find the source, but he made fun of an opponent in an election for being straight. What kind of tolerance does it show that he shows hatred for someone because of their sexual orientation (irony alarms going off)? Doug has apologized already. I want Buckley to do the same thing.

Posted by: Lori Ingham(ConChrist) | November 17, 2009 12:01 PM

DELETED DUE TO CONTENT

Posted by: Mike | November 17, 2009 12:40 PM

Lori, I think we've all made equivalent slips of the tongue to Buckley's is saying "thing." Do you think he intended it to be unkind? Yes, the video is vulgar, but I do not know very many people who have not made flip comments about something Hitler should have done. The term "teabagger" was not chosen by Buckley, or any liberal. It comes directly from the signs carried by protesters at the first tea party protest. I actually think your criticism would be fair if teabagger were not in general use by liberals: Buckley is not to blame for popularizing the term, he's just followed a dumb trend. When someone has been called a teabagger, then beaten to death, I will agree that it might be a term as hateful as "faggot." A couple of people have claimed that Buckley has made fun of people for being straight. I'd love to see what they are referring to, but I'm not sure why they're so upset about this. Gay people worry about being made fun of because it is often a precurser to violence or a sign that the mocker believes we should not be treated equally. Straight people would have a reason to be upset with Buckley for making fun of them if they were unable to hold hands in public or if states passed laws that limit their participation in society.

Posted by: Landon Bryce | November 17, 2009 1:10 PM

What a shame. As a conservative I agree with many of the issues you discuss here. I appreciate the passion you bring to the table. No doubt there are people in the conservative movement who think the things that you said and of course there are people on the left who think some pretty nasty things as well. They get away with it because they, in large part control the debate due to their continued dominance of large media. What you said was hateful and wrong. I agree with those who say that, when you talk like that you probably feel that way deep down. Your apology seems sincere enough but understand this. You have given Democrats, liberals, leftists, etc a hammer and they will use it against all conservatives. A lot of work by a lot of people in this area is set back because somebody couldn't control their innermost feelings. As I said, what a shame.

Posted by: Eric | November 17, 2009 1:11 PM

Time will tell whether Doug's contrition is genuine and whether he will really reconsider his views about gay people. He's entitled to think and say what he wants, but the world would be a better place without people railing on about the proclivities of others when such "lifestyles" don't personally affect them in any way.

If someone refers to anyone--be it a politician, and actor or a plebe--as a faggot on the airwaves, he has not so much proven himself a bigot and proven himself an idiot. At the time, I bet he relished what he anticipated would be a fair amount of attention. I bet he doesn't think so now.

All sorts of people offer apologies once the consequences of their outbursts hit, and the God talk is merely one more predictable aspect of this. It took the loss of a couple of blather outlets and a modest amount of negative press to convince Doug that he screwed up. But he's been doing the same thing for years and I highly doubt that recent goings-on will have a lasting effect. I've seen this pattern far too many times. But who knows, maybe he really will change his mind, or failing that, will quit railing about stuff in a way that only embarrasses him.

I also see that Judy, though no longer blogging here, boasts the same level of cognitive candlepower she always has.

Posted by: kemibe | November 17, 2009 2:46 PM

"I plan on spending my time in prayer and reflection, looking inward to the unhealthy malice in my heart..."

Doug, good for you.

A natural question for you: why do you think you have ended up with so much anger and hate for gay people? Did a gay person hurt you? How is 2 people of the same gender in love a bad thing? Is homophobia so pervasive in our society that you were swept by its undertow? How many gay people do you truly know?

If you are truly contrite, then there are 3 parts to sincere apology:

1) Express regret

2) Repair the damage

3) Arrange things so that this will never happen again.

You've done the easiest of the 3. What is your plan for addressing the other 2?

(I posted this in the comment section of your apology, but I'll post it here again, since I'm not sure where you're reading.)

Posted by: Mutie | November 17, 2009 2:48 PM

There is lots of irony to this story-- the fact that Doug hung himself out to dry through the use of the exact cutting edge format he had crafted over the past few years, and instead of reporting the news and offering insight like a pundit, instead he became the news and has been pundified as a result. If only he'd called him a maggot. One misguided vitriolic tirade does not define this man, or change the fact that he is a great father, wonderful husband and the leader he has been for his immediate community. If you knew him personally you'd be completely miffed about how this happened, granted the words were hurtful and not needed, but without seeing the manner of context i can envision it wasn't nearly as heartless as its been portrayed. Doug hasn't tried to explain it away and Skip was in the moment and realized instantly that Doug's window of carelessness was a dubious one. He wasn't involved in gross, malicious and sinister hate speech as some would want us to believe, he was being a sophmoric entertainer that ensnared himself in an inextricable scenario. A sobering moment for a guy that is as mature, competent and up front as they come. Doug-- i am sure you are being hard on yourself over this, and you shouldn't be. Your a believer and seek salvation, your forgiveness has been real and apology contrite. We shouldn't lose sight of the big picture and all the 'real' issues that exist on many levels from the county to the globe. Your error doesn't diminish your value as a person, your success as a businessman and your belief in the greatest nation on earth. Your words inflicted pain in an unintended way, but you didn't cause anybody a mortal wound, cause anyone to lose their job, effect a generation, or inflict bodily injury. People have done a lot worse and others in much higher places have fallen much further. People find joy in seeing other peoples demise. You fell below a higher standard for that idiotic moment, but it doesn't for an instant cheapen the body of your work and time spent on valuable things. Its your teachable moment-- unfortunately the President didn't invite you to the white house for a beer. The opposition has an arrow in their quiver to use against the republican party, but that arrow can't penetrate a twisted idealogy, fanaticism about all things improper, irrevelent and inconsequential intentions. Take a reprieve and refocus your purpose. Go out and make some lemonade! You are far too intelligent to go away and hide under a rock with anonymity.

Posted by: mt | November 17, 2009 2:48 PM

Gee, Kemibe, that's one of the nicest, printable things you've ever said about me, but I demand an apology as my feelings are really hurt.

Posted by: judy paris | November 17, 2009 3:35 PM

Landon - Your anger and oversensitive are puffed up a bit much, I fear. His comments were horrible, he has apologized for them and most people who hold the same belief on marriage as he does (I am one of them) do not agree with or endorse such hate filled messages. You said nothing about the hate filled messages (and actions) poured out by the folks preaching "tolerance" on your side of this issue. I believe that means you don't feel the same way about those actions? I never heard the second comments you mentioned so I can't comment on them. Yes his speech here was hateful. You are just eating that up because you seem to believe that means that anyone who has a similar view on marriage or a view on the radical form of acceptance being labeled "tolerance" is inspired and motivated by hate. As someone on that side of the fence I must say you couldn't be further from the truth. I don't care what sin one is committing, I believe that Christ's love is available to them if they would admit where they stand (a sinner like we all are) and turn towards Christ and accept his gift. I am a sinner, my sin drove nails in Christ's hands. My sin required this same forgiveness and is just as reprehensible in God's sight. I deserve Hell as much as the next person. I try to keep this in mind when dealing with other people. They are all someone Christ died for, in fact that is part of my motivation for a desire to call sin, sin. I am not saying I am perfect but reminding people there is a perfect standard and we often fall short. Is that hate? I don't think so. In fact I think it takes love to tell someone they are doing something wrong if you believe it is wrong. Not holier than thou either... I say that with the humble knowledge that I am a sinner. That doesn't mean I don't sometimes say hurtful things, hold hateful thoughts or get angry. In fact is there anyone reading this that hasn't or doesn't? I try to keep them internal and deal with them and remember that they are also a special, created person loved by God. Sometimes I fail and it gets out and I feel horrible. Does that mean I have a deep hate for the person? No, it means I let my anger and passion rule and got off kilter and said some horrible things I feel bad about. I am sure Doug doesn't care for Ray as his favorite person, I am sure Doug is angry at a lot of the things ray has said, done or been alleged to have done. I am sure he finds his politics incompatible most of the time. I am also, however, sure he doesn't truly hate Ray Buckley. He said some horrible things and apologized. What else do you want? Why preach the same hate back at him? You also seemed to be saying some keywords in other replies. Hate Speech and even mentioned murder. I can only imagine that is a blanket approval for hate speech/hate crime legislation. Danger slope, man. Why is the speech you and others have shown from your point of view not hateful? Who is to decide? What happens if the investigator judge and jury happened to be conservative leaning? Hate speech is a crazy thing to legislate and it just isn't necessary. Murder is already illegal. What one said or why one was angry enough or motivated enough to murder shouldn't matter. Instead we should have serious penalties for murder, period. As for "getting even" with someone who says something like Doug said, I think we see the "free market" doing a fine job. Under an umbrella of hate speech laws he would be punished for his speech. He could be fined, jailed, etc. Simply for saying something he is freely allowed to say. I wouldn't censor people saying hate filled things towards Doug or myself. It's called getting thicker skin and rising above the fray (as Ray has done in this case with his non-statements). In this case, Doug has lost two jobs, lost a position on a campaign and lost much political capitol and may potentially face further ramifications still from the "private sector". No need for hate speech laws here.

Posted by: Mike Walsh | November 17, 2009 4:13 PM

Mike, Saying someone is a bigot, especially when their comments prove that to be a statement of fact is nothing like calling someone a faggot. What comment of mine do you find hateful? What comment of mine is not strictly accurate? All people who thing they deserve rights and privileges that should be denied to other people are bigots. You think gay people should be treated worse than straight people, that we are not entitled to get equal benefits from our employers or from the government. That makes you a bigot. Calling you that is not hateful, angry, or oversensitive. If you doubt the need for hate crime laws, you need to look into the murder of George Steven Lopez Mercado. This gay teenager was decapitated and burned in Puerto Rico last week. The chief investigator, still on the case, has made the statement that Mercado's death should be a warning to other gay people. Hate crimes laws exist in part to protect minority groups in situations like that, where bigotry on the part of local authorities makes them unsafe. Is that really scary to you?

Posted by: Landon Bryce | November 17, 2009 4:38 PM

Last comment from me, Landon. I am not asking for gay people to be treated differently. I am not asking for any "right or privilege" that I want to see anyone else denied. Marriage is an institution between a man and a woman, that is available to you right this very second. It serves no practical utility to have homosexual marriage. It doesn't fit within the definition of what marriage is and it is wrong and immoral according to a law much larger than me or you. It is wrong and illegal just as a polyamorous marriage would be. The individuals involved still have the same rights I do. That case you quote doesn't say anything to me about hate crimes laws. The murderers should be tried and convicted and receive stiff penalties. I would be fine with the death penalty issued by the state. The chief investigator should have been removed from the case for showing too much emotion about the case and having an obvious conflict of interest. In fact, it sounds like he is in violation of possible ethical practices of a police officer and should be investigated and disciplined accordingly. A murder was committed. There are penalties for murder. By your argument saying it is wrong to offer special treatment I can't possible support special laws for "special" classes of people. Anyway, this bigot has to get back to it. At least you called me a bigot without any hate intended. I pray the best for you and your loved ones.

Posted by: Mike Walsh | November 17, 2009 5:17 PM

Mike, although I find you bigoted, you are not hateful, either. But, Mike, your definition of marriage is based, I believe, only on your religious views. I do not find support in our Constitution for the idea that, when people object to something on only religious grounds, it is fair for the religious views of one group of people to take utter precedence over those of another group. Catholics do not believe in divorce or birth control either, and I do not think it was right for them to use political power to keep those things illegal for as long as they did. I do not think it was right was people to use the Bible to justify slavery, even though the Biblical support for slavery is at least as strong as the condemnation of homosexuality. Certainly, the Bible is much clearer in its condemnation of miscegenation than it is of homosexuality, and we all agree that the United States was wrong to use that as a basis for denying interracial couples the right to marry, don't we?
And, Mike, the need for hate crime laws is that there has to be a legal basis for asking someone like this guy to step down. Both he and his supervisor are denying that there is a problem. People are asking the FBI to use the hate crimes statute to provide a legal basis for monitoring the case. I cannot see how that is anything other than a good thing.
But I have felt for years that hate crimes should be renamed "domestic terrorism," because that's really the issue. Sometimes people really do kill gay people (or Christians) to send a message to all Christians. If by killing you someone prevents other Christians from assembling freely, he has committed two crimes.
Many, many gay people oppose hate crimes legislation, and I don't know any gay people who do not have mixed feelings about it. Many gay people were angry that Obama passed hate crimes rather than the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. We prefer that legislation because it does not have the thought crime element that hate crimes does, and it actually addresses equality. With reasonable exceptions for private individuals and religious organizations, people should not be able to fire others because of their sexual orientation. Or treat them differently in regard to housing, which is a major problem.
Thanks for the discussion, and I wish you well.

Posted by: Landon Bryce | November 17, 2009 5:52 PM

@Landon: You said: "Mike, Doug said that a gay, black performer should should choke to death on a chicken bone or a piece of watermelon.." Wanda Sykes is not gay. She mentioned having kids. And to set the record straight, she is not without her own transgressions. I think this comment must have been a "response" to the fact that it was on public television that Sykes FIRST said she hoped another public figure that she hated would choke on his meds and that his kidneys would fail in the presence of Obama who sat there and laughed his head off at it. It was a huge scandal at the time. But she never lost her job over it I'm sure. Do you remember when another public figure (can't remember who) said she wished Judge Clarence Thomas's wife would feed him a lot of fatty foods so that he would die of a heart attack? What happened to her? Nothing. There is plenty of this from the other side to go around. People are afraid now to say they believe in marriage between a man and woman...period. Should this be? Does belief in traditional marriage automatically make one 'anti-gay'? I don't think so. I really do not think Doug harbors bad feelings towards gay people in general. I have never read him uttering a bad word before ever about that. I don't think he approves of using words like that. Consider that: 1) Said in private while letting off steam and would otherwise never have been heard 2) Published by someone with an agenda for the purpose of self-enrichment 3) Subject of the rant is someone who is not well-liked for his tactics -- who does this all the time in the name of the D party and is elevated for his 'good work' as it is seen as targeting conservatives and a good thing. (The last thing he was accused of was impersonating a Viet Nam Vet by the mother of a dead soldier who he insulted by basically telling her to suck up her loss - look it up) So, no one condones using hurtful words or doing hurtful deeds. "Let he who is without guilt cast the first stone" is a saying I've heard a lot.

Posted by: MaineFisherman | November 17, 2009 5:52 PM

She's gay. Wanda's wife Alex gave birth to their twin daughters: http://loldarian.blogspot.com/2009/05/photo-surfaces-of-wanda-sykes-wife-alex.html
But, actually, I think you are right in your statement that Lambert was reacting with legitimate satire to Sykes' joke about wanting Rush Limbaugh dead. So, although I think it does display racism to say one wants a black performer to choke on a chicken bone or a watermelon rind, I agree that his comments about Sykes should not be viewed as homophobic. Thanks for making me see that.

Posted by: Landon Bryce | November 17, 2009 6:01 PM

At least you were honest. You said nothing more than many others still think. The ones who are back-peddling and distancing themselves from you. The hypocrites. Bigotry is Arrogance, Ignorance and Malice. But at least you were open about it, not trying to pretend lip-service to "equality" while stabbing others in the back.

Posted by: Zoe Brain | November 17, 2009 7:23 PM

So you're saying that the attacks that come from people like Sykes and Buckley, and the woman who attacked Chief Justice/SCOTUS Thomas is just OK? (because after all Thomas is a CONSERVATIVE black so he must not be deserving of protection too?) Have you ever asked for an apology for the stuff RB himself has done to many of the people in his community for years? Does the Democrat party condone his behavior? I think they do. They even celebrate it. Why do we have to take that abuse? We have to stop the double standard. It is just accepted now that there is going to be hatred coming from the NHDP party and no one ever challenges it. I think for Lambert this was a one-time off the wall outburst and probably not even anything to do with attacking gays in general. @TTG I do not accept your insinuation that this is anything sinister built in to his political views. Sometimes the left takes this need for retaliation way too far, such as condemning someone as 'racist' just because they are for capitalism, or opposed to gov't managed health care. Those are positions and neither should be considered particularly controversial.

Posted by: MaineFisherman | November 17, 2009 7:33 PM

"Gee, Kemibe, that's one of the nicest, printable things you've ever said about me, but I demand an apology as my feelings are really hurt."

And that's as close to a grammatically correct sentence as you'll ever get. By the way, all words are printable. It's amusing, and instructive, that you do nothing but spew bile about people whose conduct has no bearing on your own sad life and then call people out for using naughty words.

I suspect that you don't actually have feelings to be hurt. You don't feel or think, you just react instinctively to certain stimuli, like a reptile.

What's really funny is that you and others keep trying to defend a position that Doug himself has disavowed, however spuriously. Way to help a brother out.

By the way, those of you attempting to use paragraph breaks need to put a {p} (with regular brackets, not curly ones) at the start of each intended paragraph. I don't know why this blog handles text the way it does, but oh well.

Posted by: kemibe | November 17, 2009 7:41 PM

Alright, one more response Landon :-) I thank you for the polite replies and back and forth here, first off. We obviously don't see eye to eye but this side off topicish discussion has remained civil. Thanks. My view on marriage comes from more than just the Bible. It comes from a family. Studies showing the importance of a father and a mother in the lives of a child (yes, divorce stinks but it happens, yes single parents exist and will for quite some time but why stack a deck against a kid in the beginning). Traditions dating back through recorded history also comes into play. But yes, I have a Biblical world view and that view is a part of this. Either there is a standard above us or there is no truth and you really have nothing to appeal to ultimately in saying I am wrong and you are right. I believe in a creator, a God with a perfect standard. Homosexuality (just like anger, adultery, same sex lust, lies, etc.) is a sin. Pushing gay marriage into law, rewriting laws, is a step I am not interested in seeing. Does that make me a bigot? I don't know. Princeton defines bigot as "a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own " Perhaps in this one issue I am not ready to endorse another opinion. I tolerate one's ability to hold that opinion but I don't accept as my own and I don't want to see it become the law of the land and see the next steps on that slippery slope. I don't believe I am a bigot but I tolerate your opinion in calling me one :-) I still disagree about the hate crimes laws. He was asked to step down without them. Also the attacks on my faith are something I can handle. I don't want to see someone arrested for having an opinion and expressing that, even if it is hateful and hurtful towards me. If someone were to murder me, then I would hope they are tried for murder (which is already a crime with a stiff enough penalty when actually enforced and properly charged... what does an extra 20 years on a life sentence do?). No, I don't support hate crime legislation. It creates special classes and can be used by the PC police and the radical tolerance arm of the homosexual movement to prevent my Pastor from preaching truths from the Bible to me because they may seem offensive or hateful to one group. I have to ask you if you have actually read and studied the Bible? Your generalizations and comments seem to tell me you haven't studied the Bible in context. I can't speak for the Catholic items, I am not Catholic. But you mention a few things that seem out of place.. Slavery... Did you know it was the Bible and a strong Christian with influence that stopped the slave trade in England? Reading a few passages out of context with no understanding of the time it was written, the full context of the entire Bible I can see why one would say the bible condones slavery. With regards to miscegenation (nice word, had to look it up - thank you for teaching me a new word) yeah there are passages where the Jews were instructed to not intermarry. Again missing the context and cultural understanding of the time and people this passage was written to I can see why you (and unfortunately others throughout this nations own history) would see it as you apparently do... The Jews were to be a people held to a high standard, worshiping their one God, following the law, obeying the temple feasts, etc. Abstain from the practices of many in the lands they were inhabiting. By intermarrying with them they were watering down their own faith. God knew they would adopt practices and drift away. They did. They intermarried and the results were disaster. This is not intermarriage fears for racial differences. In fact the Bible is clear that we are ALL created equally in God's own image. One reading a Bible with a clear understanding should know that racism is never acceptable. That discrimination against something that is a choice is never acceptable. Disabled, Black, White, Male, Female we are created in God's image. Lifestyle choices and Religion are something altogether different. (there are still no clear scientific research that argues with me that I have seen. Even if there were it is not the created order of things, it would be a result of the fall. Same as genetic mutations that lead to all sorts of problems, some potentially including addiction disorders researchers have been discovering.) The New Testament still strongly warns against the same type of intermarriage the Old Testament did when it warns us to not be unequally yoked. What that means is if a believer committed to Christ marries a non believer who hates Christ there is a strong chance of conflict, of compromise on matters of faith and a result a bad situation for the believer and a resulting bad witness to the unbelieving spouse.. A no win situation. That has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with race. Anyone who miscarried the meaning to apply to race was perverting God's clear word. Anyway I wanted to clear those two items up and suggest that you study the Bible and get a reputable Bible Commentary or Study Bible to help you along. Even if you have no desire to apply the truths or read it as anything other than fiction it's worth the read and if nothing else it can help you understand what you obviously have strong issues with. Anyway this is truly my last off topic reply here :-) I honestly do wish you well and I truly will keep you in prayer (for health, safety and for salvation.. Jesus died for all and His love is greater than any sin in our lives. If he forgave me He will forgive you if you put your trust in Him.) Have a good Thanksgiving.

Posted by: Mike Walsh | November 17, 2009 11:11 PM

Mike: I've studied the Bible enough to know that modern Christianity of all stripes ignores much of what it actually teaches. The Bible is unabashedly pro-slavery. It is a misinterpretation to claim otherwise. Likewise, it teaches in no uncertain terms that women are not equal to men. The Bible really isn't joking about miscegenation. Jesus said nothing about homosexuality but condemned divorce inescapably. The New Testament is much more directly critical of Christians loaning money for interest than it is of gay marriage, isn't it? Research that was not funded and conducted by people already biased against gay people does not support any of the contentions you claim, does it? You are certainly entitled to your religious beliefs, but you are not entitled to say that your beliefs should be the only ones that form public policy. If my religious beliefs allow me to marry as a gay man, how are you not infringing on my religious freedom to a much greater extent allowing gay marriage could possibly infringe on yours? Thanks again for the discussion.

Posted by: Landon Bryce | November 18, 2009 12:44 AM

"Either there is a standard above us or there is no truth" This is moronic on its face. Human societies are perfectly capable of devising moral frameworks. To pretend that standards arise from some ineffable external source is both an abdication of responsibility and a meaningless concession to a "god" that human beings invented in the first place. At some point people decided to conjure up an invisible celestial policeman and put him in charge of enforcing rules that quite naturally already governed the conduct of humans and other social animals. To imagine that people only behave as they do thanks to the machinations and wishes of some sadistic and capricious skygod is mindless in the extreme, and at best represents a classic horse-cart transposition.

Landon is correct. The Bible is rife with hypocrisy and is about as useful as a moral guide as Penthouse magazine. Christians love to cherry-pick what suits them from the OT and then deny that the NT fails to support such calumny. If you can quote the mythical Jesus figure in terms of what he is alleged to have said about homosexuality (or abortion, or embryonic stem-cell research...et cetera) then by all means do, because I've read the whole thing more than once and am pretty confident in my comprehension skills.

Posted by: kemibe | November 18, 2009 1:33 AM

Doug you made a mistake and you have admirably "owned" it, much more than most people have done in similar situations. You sincerely apologized. You did not spew the liberal battlecry of "my words could have been calibrated differently" or "I'm sorry if I offended anyone", you apologized to the man directly and publicly, as you should have. All of you hypocrites here standing in judgement take a good, long look in the mirror...many of you know deep inside that you would not have had the integrity or fortitude to act the same way given similar circumstances. I don't always agree with Doug, but at least I know he is a man who holds himself accountable. That's a core difference between liberals and conservatives; we hold ourselves accountable, liberals blame it on someone or something else while playing the victim. The real shame is that reading through many of the posts here and in the Union Leader, the issue of gay rights has been shoved aside and replaced with hate and stupidity.

Posted by: Aaron in Amherst | November 18, 2009 3:42 AM

Wow, Kemibe, you're a legend...to bad it's in your own mind. Your comments about God and the Bible prove just how little you truly know about both. Obviously, what's in your mind (your own inflated ego and intellect) need to make the journey to your heart. But, hey, the Apostle Paul killed Christians before his conversion experience. I'll continue to pray for your salvation. I just said that 'cause I know it will make you mad :). Geez...now I gotta ask for forgiveness AGAIN! Cheers and have a great day!

Posted by: judy | November 18, 2009 7:39 AM

Content deleted for content according to the FAQ. If you don't like the rules, go start your own blog with your own rules.

Posted by: b.g. | November 18, 2009 1:57 PM

Doug, I am gay and what you said was hateful. But, I'm a Christian and I forgive you. I hope your prayer leads to discernment.

Posted by: Patrick | November 18, 2009 6:08 PM

I have no intentions of defending Doug's actions. His latest expression of his view of the gay community definately crosses the line. That said; I've never read so many self serving hypocritical comments in my life. I have a proud gay member of my family who I love dearly and I have had many opportunities to hang with his friends. Only when the gay communitiy can stop calling each other "faggots" will I be okay with their criticism others for doing so!!!

Posted by: Terry Stewart | November 19, 2009 10:41 AM

Doug, Too bad you couldn't have tried to live without "malice in your heart" before you got caught in a VERY public and painful event for which you had to face the consequences. I hope from here on out you approach life as a much more open minded person.

Posted by: Kelly | November 20, 2009 8:22 AM

Sorry folks, but there are a lot, I mean a whole lot of things that are going on in NH and the rest of the country to be more concerned about. One group was offended by someone's careless and thougtless remark. If "I'm sorry" is not good enough then that is just too bad. Get over it, and get a life. Tolerance is a two way street.

Posted by: Jim_NH | November 21, 2009 7:43 PM

The biggest blasphemy of all is telling someone else what Christ or God wants. What ignorant arrogance. We tell children about Santa Claus when they are young. We tell them babies come from anywhere but where they originate. We feed them full of all sorts of misinformation in the belief that the fantasies we weave will in some way be easier for them to grasp. We are as a culture, a people, a species privy to more and more "discoveries" each year -- and we give awards to the mortals who "unlock the human genome." Ah, there's the rub: unlock -- which by its definition is the opposite of "lock." The knowledge, the fact of the matter, the essence of the phenomenon at hand was always "there" -- the difference becomes that man finally has arrived at a level of sophistication that one or more among us has reached the point of comprehending what existed all along. How on Earth -- I mean this quite literally -- do any of us have the gall to assume we know anything at all about the Creator of all existence? We feed people children what they need to know when they are young and no more information than we think they can process. How dare any human think s/he is more made in the Almighty's image than another or by design more on the "right" path. Get a grip, bigots. Do not use religion as an excuse for ignorance.

Posted by: Andy | November 26, 2009 4:36 AM

Post a comment


Search


PODCAST

Care and Feeding of GraniteGrok by PoliGrok, LLC

blog advertising is good for you

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts

Subscribe to this blog's feed
[What is this?]
Powered by
Movable Type 3.35
mobile phone