BLOGActive: On WAMU-88.5 at Noon

Written by on July 14, 2004 in Media, Radio - 12 Comments

Be sure to tune in to 88.5 FM in DC, WAMU Radio, the DC NPR Affiliate. I’ll be on at some point between 12:05 and 12:30. If you don’t live in DC, you can access WAMU’s webcast at WAMU’s Listen Live Page

The Atlanta Journal and Constitution gave us great coverage, including the Blog address in the article and on line! Thanks AJC!! To read the story, go here:

‘Outing’ of gay Capitol aides adds angst to same-sex marriage battle

12 Comments on "BLOGActive: On WAMU-88.5 at Noon"

  1. Anonymous July 14, 2004 at 4:33 pm · Reply

    Michael is getting massacred on the radio. Finally, he’s being seen for the self-promoting nutcase that he is.

  2. Anonymous July 14, 2004 at 4:42 pm · Reply

    You were obviously listening to a differen program than I was. In reality, Michael was articulate and well spoken, and he presented himself and his case quite well.

    I’ve guess we’ve all come to expect these kinds of distortions from the right, especially from the self-delusional queens whose efforts help prop up our enemies. Too bad they can’t use their talents to fight the good fight…

    - Chris in DC

  3. Michael Rogers July 14, 2004 at 4:45 pm · Reply

    Wow, you are not exactly reflective of the opinions of the folks who called me after the appearance, but as I’ve said, everyone is entitled to their opinion here, even if, like you, it’s hidden behind the “anonymous” option. What say you, readers who caught the show on WAMU? I do regret cutting Lyndon off once, I did apologize for it. (Unlike the current administration, BLOGActive admits mess ups)

    Anyway….back to the posts…

  4. Anonymous July 14, 2004 at 4:51 pm · Reply

    If anything, the other person on the show was the one who resorted to personal name-calling.

    I also have to take issue with GLASS’ offensive website. They use the whole website to blast gay activists.

    Wait are you blasting those same gay activists whos blood, sweat, and tears made it possible for you to get a job on the hill and live a gay life at the same time?

    That GLASS only recently formed- seems to me to prove that this outing campaign is having an effect: its getting some completely self-serving senate staffers to actually get up and take a risk, probably the first time in their lives.

  5. No one July 14, 2004 at 5:39 pm · Reply

    Why is it that all gay right’s activist always come across sounding like 4-year-olds in desperate need of a nap when they discuss the FMA? I am not writing this response to oppose your agenda; in fact, I pretty much support it. However, I do not support your methods. Not only have you got a very limited amount of people to convert themselves to share your views but you have pushed many moderates away from you. Trust me – your actions have solidified support for the FMA in many people who would have otherwise been very moderate about the issue – how ironic.
    You might have 20 years experience in activism but it does not show. If you were really interested in bettering your life – fight the fight from the inside, you have resources there as well. I am afraid, however, that you are not smart enough to do this and you will just keep banging on a locked door, which no one will ever open. Use your head, Mike, what you are doing now is frivolous and – in fact, working against you. Right now you are the right wing’s strongest weapon.

  6. Anonymous July 14, 2004 at 5:39 pm · Reply

    A big thanks to the friend of Tolman who posted his comments. Please let Tolman know that there are MANY PROGRESSIVES who do not agree with these ridiculous tactics. It is definitely NOT–as Rogers tries to present in his typically reductionistic and sloganeering manner–a simple right wing/left wing issue. Many of the comments that have been posted and deleted from this site are from progressives who do not support this crazy project. As a progressive myself, I disagree with these self-righteous tactics as do ALL of my circle of progressive friends and acquaintances. Matt Foreman, the executive director of NGLTF (an organization for which Rogers worked for a brief period as director of development and which—given his own more often than not weird logic—he must support ideologically or else he is a hypocrite himself), who has worked for LGBT rights for over 25 years, wrote recently in the Blade that “I think that outing an individual is only appropriate when that individual is in a position to make law or policy and makes anti-gay policy. It’s totally inappropriate in any other situation.” Does that sound like someone who just wants to preserve their relationships on the Hill or rather the opinion of someone who has for years studied and worked tirelessly promoting LGBT rights? You might disagree with Foreman but at least you can’t say that it is only the right wing in America that is denouncing this. It’s coming from across the political spectrum.

  7. Anonymous July 14, 2004 at 5:43 pm · Reply

    FINALLY! What is the actual URL?

  8. Anonymous July 14, 2004 at 5:45 pm · Reply

    professional eater mike rogers (code name: pork pie) enjoys eating and talking about eating.

  9. Anonymous July 14, 2004 at 5:46 pm · Reply

    The bottom line is this…Why should we protect those that work to keep Santorum, Musgrave and other haters in office? Don’t you people get it? It’s like asking Blacks to work for Jesse Helms, even as he fought the advancement civil rights …

    I don’t hear any of you saying that women were ok in the Taliban, because the “voters back home want them in black fabric, beaten and oppressed”

    SilverSpring

  10. Anonymous July 14, 2004 at 5:47 pm · Reply

    i am outing mike rogers as being a friendless fat sweaty pig. people who know him refer to him as lard bucket and walking girth.

  11. Anonymous July 14, 2004 at 5:48 pm · Reply

    ***THIS JUST IN***THIS JUST IN***THIS JUST IN***THIS JUST IN

    Washington Blade offers another important opinion . . .

    http://www.washblade.com/2004/7-2/view/columns/dont.cfm

    Don’t out gay Hill staffers
    It’s easier to terrorize than organize, but activists only hurt our cause when they out Hill staffers

    By Lynden Armstrong and Mat Young
    Friday, July 02, 2004

    Sometimes, when we are under assault, it’s easier to attack our own rather than fight those who are actually causing us harm. In politics and in war, this is often referred to as a circular firing squad.

    As reported in the Blade, that is exactly what some gay activists seem to be doing through their efforts to out gay and lesbian staffers on Capitol Hill.

    As co-chairs of the Gay, Lesbian & Allies Senate Staff Caucus, we forcefully condemn any campaign that would “out” lesbian or gay congressional staff. The GLASS Caucus has been working to create a more positive, safe and affirming environment for gay and lesbian staffers; we believe that outing staff is counterproductive and will only encourage some staffers to go even deeper into the closet.

    It may seem exciting to threaten staffers by outing them if they don’t come out themselves and to shock members of Congress about the unknown sexual orientations of their staffers. But if these activists were truly committed to ensuring equal rights, they would be organizing gay people to educate the public and members of Congress about public policy issues affecting our lives.

    BUT WHY ORGANIZE when you can terrorize?

    Anyone who would threaten to out gay and lesbian staffers — potentially costing them their careers and their economic security — is not only cruel, they are doing nothing to further the fight for equality. This will do nothing to stop the Federal Marriage Amendment from coming up for a vote in mid-July.

    In fact, the FMA will most likely fall far short of the necessary 67 votes for passage. So, we’re left wondering: What exactly are these activists hoping to accomplish?

    They certainly aren’t changing anyone’s value systems. They certainly aren’t using logic and reason and the values of inclusion and fairness to sway members of Congress. Rather, the only likely outcome of this campaign would be to potentially cost some people their jobs and to give our opponents ammunition by showing the country how we treat our own.

    Staffers may advise their bosses, but at the end of the day, it is the member of Congress who is accountable for his or her vote. Many gay staffers don’t even advise their bosses on gay rights, but on a host of other issues or serve in administrative or technical positions.

    Outing a staff assistant, a legislative correspondent, or even someone as senior as a legislative director or a chief of staff will not change a member’s beliefs. It is in our best interest that members have gay staffers, whether closeted or not.

    There are LGBT people on Capitol Hill making changes in both small and large ways everyday. Some do it by being out and actively contributing to policy discussions. Others do so by coming out to select coworkers and slowly and subtly changing the atmosphere in their offices.

    Outing is not a panacea to convincing anti-gay politicians that we are full citizens deserving of equal rights. Rather is it an incredibly reckless, misdirected, and lazy form of activism.

    COMING OUT AND speaking out for ourselves is a personal journey, and it is one that some seem to have forgotten.

    The coming out process is a difficult one for almost all of us. We begin by coming out to ourselves and then to our friends and family. Often the last step is in our workplace to our colleagues and bosses.

    That last step is usually taken only after we are reasonably confident that we will be judged on our skills and contributions and not our sexual orientation.

    LGBT people — even Capitol Hill staffers — must be allowed to go through the process of coming out and merging our personal and professional lives at a pace that is comfortable.

    An individual’s sexual orientation should not be an issue for employment and by outing staff to their employers, these activists reinforce the notion that there is something wrong with being gay or lesbian.

    While some may disagree with the mindset of closeted LGBT staffers who work for members of Congress who do not support LGBT equality, we believe those are the personal decisions to be made by each staffer.

    Gays working for members from both political parties can and do have successful careers on Capitol Hill, but outing is a disservice to that goal.

    We call on these activists to stop attacking LGBT staff and direct their energy toward more constructive causes.

  12. Michael Rogers July 14, 2004 at 6:09 pm · Reply

    For those who seem interested….I’m a vegetarian…
    So… no pork, no sausage pizza contests, etc….
    My favorite lunch is Subway Veggie Delite.

Leave a Comment