Like millions of others across the nation, I attended one of today's marriage equality rallies. Since I was in L.A. last night anyways to support an aspiring-actor friend of mine at a red carpet event (and indulge in the gratitude he showed by buying us expensive "bottle service" afterwards), I figured I'd just stay overnight and attend the rally at L.A. city hall. It was really a great event, with thousands of both gays and straights united for a common cause. Furthermore, everyone was positive, friendly, and a much better and more accurate representation of our community than some others had been at earlier rallies.
Of course, there were counterprotestors there as well, holding up their usual gigantic banners with the typical statements such as "God Hates Fags" and "Homo Sex Is Sin." However, they were for the most part ignored, and a few of us did our part by steering people away from them and towards the main event so there wouldn't be any more embarrassing incidents. Not to mention the fact that they all had a massive ring of LAPD officers protecting them them on all sides, with about 30 additional officers on the steps above who were standing by just in case.
However, I did notice another counterprotestor at the rally apart from the main group, an elderly African-American woman. Believe it or not, I'm actually glad she decided to show up. She was serenading the crowds with classic Christian hyms and didn't seem to be quite "all there" mentally (surprise).
Nonetheless, I could not have been happier with the shirt this woman chose to wear to the rally. The shirt had a picture of president-elect Barack Obama, and above the messiah's charming face, was a direct quote he made during the campaign stating very plainly that he did NOT support same-sex marriage.
He certainly isn't my "messiah" as I already have the real one anyways ;)
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Another "Unconventional" View of Same-Sex Marriage From a Gay Man Himself
It's good to see there are at least some other gay men who can look at the "big picture" on the same-sex marriage issue, even at the risk of being reviled by the gay community as a whole. I've learned that it's better to be hated for speaking the truth than to be loved and adored for ignoring it.
Anyways, this is a post from a good friend of mine who is just as gay as I am, and just as gay as any other gay man (perhaps even more so in a way lol). I promised I would not reveal his name so he wouldn't have an angry homo lynch mob after him.
While I don't agree with completely eliminating marriage altogether as he seems to be advocating, he still makes some very valid points. I'm hoping that the one good thing that comes out of the passage of Prop. 8 is that it causes us to become more open-minded and try a new approach next time, since the approach we have been taking (and have continued to take since last Tuesday) evidently is not working. Anyways, time to let my friend speak:
"For years, I've been spewing that gays have missed the mark on the whole gay marriage thing. I've been attacked by gays for years that my views were biased and off base. Of course, I think fairness for all is appropriate. I don't believe one group of people should be entitled to special recognition, benefits, status and the such, due to race, sex, sexual orientation, especially from a government that claims liberty and justice for all.
I was raised in a very conservative, truly evangelical church. One thing I've seen over the years is that people hold close their traditions. Marriage is no different. I think supporters of Prop 8 across the country are afraid that their tradition is going to be disgraced and violated. The religious "rite" of marriage should be protected for those people. However, it shouldn't be protected by an amendment to a Constitution.
To get to the point, I think that if opponents of Prop 8 want to be effective, then they need to change their strategy. Prop 8 opponents really thought that their cause was going to be the victor in the last election. Shockingly to some, those very people who voted blue, harshly criticize and oppose gay marriage. So, we want fairness for all? I suggest Prop 8.2. I feel that if gays want to make a real impact, they will have to turn the tables on Prop 8 supports. How do we do this? We take away their marriage. Well, sort of. I propose gays raise signatures and place a ballot initiative to remove all State recognition of marriage for all. I'm not really sure why the Government ever got involved in the first place, but government has no place in a religious institution. You want to get 'married', fine, keep it in your church. You want your union recognized for legal and social reasons, apply for a Civil Union. Fairness for all why still respecting others.
As a side note, I'm really tired of hearing about how "hateful" Prop 8 was. It's not hateful to hold a value to high esteem and to fight to protect it. I know it's hard for some to understand that the idea of Prop 8 is not hate, it's about protecting. Again, is it their fault their ideas towards the homosexual community are what they are? Maybe it's our message or the delivery of that message. We can't win without educating people about our lifestyle. What's an effective tool? It would be each and everyone of us reaching people in our own circle of influence. We all know people who voted yes on 8. We all know people who would have supported voting yest on 8. It's our duty to reach out to people to show them that we are no different than them. It's our duty to be that connection to those outside our community. We can't remain in the closet and tolerate injustice in our workplaces, schools, and churches. We can't remain in our comfort zone. We have to reach out and show people that we are equal, and sometimes above equal, when it comes to fashion and decorating you know ;-) "
Anyways, this is a post from a good friend of mine who is just as gay as I am, and just as gay as any other gay man (perhaps even more so in a way lol). I promised I would not reveal his name so he wouldn't have an angry homo lynch mob after him.
While I don't agree with completely eliminating marriage altogether as he seems to be advocating, he still makes some very valid points. I'm hoping that the one good thing that comes out of the passage of Prop. 8 is that it causes us to become more open-minded and try a new approach next time, since the approach we have been taking (and have continued to take since last Tuesday) evidently is not working. Anyways, time to let my friend speak:
"For years, I've been spewing that gays have missed the mark on the whole gay marriage thing. I've been attacked by gays for years that my views were biased and off base. Of course, I think fairness for all is appropriate. I don't believe one group of people should be entitled to special recognition, benefits, status and the such, due to race, sex, sexual orientation, especially from a government that claims liberty and justice for all.
I was raised in a very conservative, truly evangelical church. One thing I've seen over the years is that people hold close their traditions. Marriage is no different. I think supporters of Prop 8 across the country are afraid that their tradition is going to be disgraced and violated. The religious "rite" of marriage should be protected for those people. However, it shouldn't be protected by an amendment to a Constitution.
To get to the point, I think that if opponents of Prop 8 want to be effective, then they need to change their strategy. Prop 8 opponents really thought that their cause was going to be the victor in the last election. Shockingly to some, those very people who voted blue, harshly criticize and oppose gay marriage. So, we want fairness for all? I suggest Prop 8.2. I feel that if gays want to make a real impact, they will have to turn the tables on Prop 8 supports. How do we do this? We take away their marriage. Well, sort of. I propose gays raise signatures and place a ballot initiative to remove all State recognition of marriage for all. I'm not really sure why the Government ever got involved in the first place, but government has no place in a religious institution. You want to get 'married', fine, keep it in your church. You want your union recognized for legal and social reasons, apply for a Civil Union. Fairness for all why still respecting others.
As a side note, I'm really tired of hearing about how "hateful" Prop 8 was. It's not hateful to hold a value to high esteem and to fight to protect it. I know it's hard for some to understand that the idea of Prop 8 is not hate, it's about protecting. Again, is it their fault their ideas towards the homosexual community are what they are? Maybe it's our message or the delivery of that message. We can't win without educating people about our lifestyle. What's an effective tool? It would be each and everyone of us reaching people in our own circle of influence. We all know people who voted yes on 8. We all know people who would have supported voting yest on 8. It's our duty to reach out to people to show them that we are no different than them. It's our duty to be that connection to those outside our community. We can't remain in the closet and tolerate injustice in our workplaces, schools, and churches. We can't remain in our comfort zone. We have to reach out and show people that we are equal, and sometimes above equal, when it comes to fashion and decorating you know ;-) "
More On Peggy Joseph and the "Race Card"
As amusing and silly as it was to watch this woman nearly have an orgasm over Obama's victory, it is downright distrubing that there are thousands, if not millions, of disadvantaged blacks (and probably poor folks of other races as well) who really DO think that Barack Obama will be taking care of them the next four years with other people's hard earned money. Granted, part of this phenomenon might be due to the fact that they read far too much into Obama's comments about "spreading the wealth," but has it perhaps occurred to them that Barack Obama, throughout the campaign, seemed to be willing to say just about anything and promise just about anything to get elected? Sadly, so many people fell for it and will be in for a big disappointment.
The harsh reality is that "Messiah" or not, Barack Obama is still a politician. He'll realize very quickly (if he hasn't already) that as President, he will not accomplish anything worthwhile without building alliances with others in Washington and procuring support from both sides of the aisle. In order to do this, he'll need to make some compromises and become more moderate in his views, or else risk alienating even members of his own party. This is the exact mistake that President Bush made, and there is no doubt in my mind that Barack Obama realizes this and is determined not to follow suit.
As a result, I would not be surprised if African Americans end up hating Obama with a passion as the ultimate traitor and backstabber, once he fails to deliver what they thought he would, and when people like Peggy Joseph don't get as much wealth "spread" to them as they anticipated. I can just picture Rev. Al Sharpton, sometime within the next few years, going on tirade after tirade before frenzied crowds of angry and jaded blacks, proclaiming something like this:
"Barack Obama isn't even a real black man anyway, he's half white! And we have now learned the hard way that even someone only half white is just as much a part of the conspiracy. This man is no Messiah, but a false prophet, and shame on us for being tricked by this Uncle Tom!"
Now, as much as I hate playing the race card, there is no doubt that race played a part in this election like no other election prior. In fact, even goofy Howard Stern, in one of his broadcasts a few weeks before the election, demonstrated the grim reality of this when he sent one of his sidekicks to Harlem to interview potential black voters about who they supported in the election. Of course, nearly all of them said they liked Obama. They were then asked if they still liked Obama when told that Obama held certain positions on the issues that in fact were held by McCain! Without batting an eye, all of these people said that they were pro-life, anti-stem cell research, and believed that we should keep our troops in Iraq as long as possible until the job is finished, as long as they were led to think that these were Obama's beliefs, which they most certainly were not. Even more outrageous, these folks in Harlem said they would love having Sarah Palin as vice-president, once they were told that Plain was OBAMA'S running mate and actually believed it. Here is the clip so you can listen for yourselves:
As hilarious as this was, in reality it's downright scary that these are people whose votes counted just as much as those of citizens responsible enough to cast their votes based on the issues. I am certainly not trying to appear racist, as I am just as disgusted at all of the white hillbillies in Arkansas who said there was no way they'd vote for Obama because he's a Muslim (which he is not). There are people who voted FOR Obama only because he's black, and there are people who voted AGAINST Obama only because he's black. Equally deplorable in my opinion, especially in an election at such a time as this with all of the crucial issues and problems our nation is facing.
I actually respect people who voted for Obama because they truly believed he was the best choice for our country based on his positions (even though I couldn't disagree more). These people, to give them credit, voted for Obama for reasons other than his race or because they got caught up in the "Obamamania" or because they automatically assumed that John McCain was going to be nothing more than a George W. Bush clone simply because he's a Republican.
The right to vote in this country is a right that we should never take for granted, especially considering that there are millions of others in the world who do not enjoy this right. However, with every right comes responsibilities, and our founding fathers assumed that we would never forget this. Apparently, some people in this country have forgotten, and maybe an intensive crash course in basic civics will avoid another embarrassing charade in future election years.
The harsh reality is that "Messiah" or not, Barack Obama is still a politician. He'll realize very quickly (if he hasn't already) that as President, he will not accomplish anything worthwhile without building alliances with others in Washington and procuring support from both sides of the aisle. In order to do this, he'll need to make some compromises and become more moderate in his views, or else risk alienating even members of his own party. This is the exact mistake that President Bush made, and there is no doubt in my mind that Barack Obama realizes this and is determined not to follow suit.
As a result, I would not be surprised if African Americans end up hating Obama with a passion as the ultimate traitor and backstabber, once he fails to deliver what they thought he would, and when people like Peggy Joseph don't get as much wealth "spread" to them as they anticipated. I can just picture Rev. Al Sharpton, sometime within the next few years, going on tirade after tirade before frenzied crowds of angry and jaded blacks, proclaiming something like this:
"Barack Obama isn't even a real black man anyway, he's half white! And we have now learned the hard way that even someone only half white is just as much a part of the conspiracy. This man is no Messiah, but a false prophet, and shame on us for being tricked by this Uncle Tom!"
Now, as much as I hate playing the race card, there is no doubt that race played a part in this election like no other election prior. In fact, even goofy Howard Stern, in one of his broadcasts a few weeks before the election, demonstrated the grim reality of this when he sent one of his sidekicks to Harlem to interview potential black voters about who they supported in the election. Of course, nearly all of them said they liked Obama. They were then asked if they still liked Obama when told that Obama held certain positions on the issues that in fact were held by McCain! Without batting an eye, all of these people said that they were pro-life, anti-stem cell research, and believed that we should keep our troops in Iraq as long as possible until the job is finished, as long as they were led to think that these were Obama's beliefs, which they most certainly were not. Even more outrageous, these folks in Harlem said they would love having Sarah Palin as vice-president, once they were told that Plain was OBAMA'S running mate and actually believed it. Here is the clip so you can listen for yourselves:
As hilarious as this was, in reality it's downright scary that these are people whose votes counted just as much as those of citizens responsible enough to cast their votes based on the issues. I am certainly not trying to appear racist, as I am just as disgusted at all of the white hillbillies in Arkansas who said there was no way they'd vote for Obama because he's a Muslim (which he is not). There are people who voted FOR Obama only because he's black, and there are people who voted AGAINST Obama only because he's black. Equally deplorable in my opinion, especially in an election at such a time as this with all of the crucial issues and problems our nation is facing.
I actually respect people who voted for Obama because they truly believed he was the best choice for our country based on his positions (even though I couldn't disagree more). These people, to give them credit, voted for Obama for reasons other than his race or because they got caught up in the "Obamamania" or because they automatically assumed that John McCain was going to be nothing more than a George W. Bush clone simply because he's a Republican.
The right to vote in this country is a right that we should never take for granted, especially considering that there are millions of others in the world who do not enjoy this right. However, with every right comes responsibilities, and our founding fathers assumed that we would never forget this. Apparently, some people in this country have forgotten, and maybe an intensive crash course in basic civics will avoid another embarrassing charade in future election years.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
WOW!!! Isn't This a Shocker?
I just came across this post on intheagora.com (one of my favorite blogs). I must say that it is quite interesting to say the least:
Obama's coattails bring victory for gay marriage ban?
By Eric Seymour
The silver lining to yesterday's election for social conservatives is that it looks like Proposition 8--the amendment to the California state constitution to ban gay marriage--is headed for victory. In a predictable yet intriguing twist, increased enthusiasm among black voters (who overwhelmingly voted for Obama) may have helped the measure win.
Exit polls showed that white voters opposed the measure, while black voters supported it. (It is a well-known fact that there is stronger opposition to gay marriage within the black community than in the nation as a whole.) With record turnout among black voters expected, that may well have been a major factor in deciding the measure's fate.
*So let me get this straight (no pun intended). All of these gay and lesbian voters strongly supported Barack Obama, yet his candidacy may have been what ultimately doomed same-sex marriage rights. Perhaps if the "messiah" had openly supported same-sex marriage, Prop. 8 would have been resoundingly defeated (as well as the similar measures in both Arizona and Florida). Nonethless, exit polls showed, for some odd reason, that Obama received almost 75% of the gay and lesbian vote nationwide and was actually perceived as the more "gay friendly" candidate. Didn't I warn people on my blog a few weeks ago that this perception was simply not true?
By golly, you can even look it up for yourself:
caseyblog1.blogspot.com
Monday, October 13
Posted at 9:24 PM
Although I have seen a lot of irony in my life, this is the most extreme and egregious example yet. Although I am not exactly pleased that Obama won the election, I anticipate that I am going to have quite a field day these next four years. Evidently, opening ceremonies have already commenced.
Obama's coattails bring victory for gay marriage ban?
By Eric Seymour
The silver lining to yesterday's election for social conservatives is that it looks like Proposition 8--the amendment to the California state constitution to ban gay marriage--is headed for victory. In a predictable yet intriguing twist, increased enthusiasm among black voters (who overwhelmingly voted for Obama) may have helped the measure win.
Exit polls showed that white voters opposed the measure, while black voters supported it. (It is a well-known fact that there is stronger opposition to gay marriage within the black community than in the nation as a whole.) With record turnout among black voters expected, that may well have been a major factor in deciding the measure's fate.
*So let me get this straight (no pun intended). All of these gay and lesbian voters strongly supported Barack Obama, yet his candidacy may have been what ultimately doomed same-sex marriage rights. Perhaps if the "messiah" had openly supported same-sex marriage, Prop. 8 would have been resoundingly defeated (as well as the similar measures in both Arizona and Florida). Nonethless, exit polls showed, for some odd reason, that Obama received almost 75% of the gay and lesbian vote nationwide and was actually perceived as the more "gay friendly" candidate. Didn't I warn people on my blog a few weeks ago that this perception was simply not true?
By golly, you can even look it up for yourself:
caseyblog1.blogspot.com
Monday, October 13
Posted at 9:24 PM
Although I have seen a lot of irony in my life, this is the most extreme and egregious example yet. Although I am not exactly pleased that Obama won the election, I anticipate that I am going to have quite a field day these next four years. Evidently, opening ceremonies have already commenced.
Focus On the Positive: Election 2008 and the Gay Vote
From the Log Cabin Republicans:
"Exit polls show Sen. John McCain received at least 1.3 million votes from gay and lesbian Americans—more than any other Republican Presidential candidate has ever received. He garnered 27% of the LGBT vote, an increase from 19% support for President Bush four years ago."
This does not surprise me, since John McCain was the most gay-friendly GOP candidate ever to run for the presidency. Even though McCain lost the election, I felt so blessed to connect with so many other gay men across the nation (mainly young, bright and ambitious like myself) who were also proud McCain supporters, scoffing at the idea, espoused by so many other gay men without batting an eye, that they are automatically obligated to vote Democrat because of their sexual orientation. Many of us work just as hard for our money as everyone else, and are thus just as horrified at the thought of the government taking even more of that hard-earned money that it already does, and "redistributing" it to people who have done absolutely nothing to deserve yet another free handout at taxpayer expense. We were also impressed with McCain's pledge to take a hard-line stance toward the Islamofacist regime in Iran, a regime which publicly executes teenagers as young as 15 who are caught in "homosexual acts." And of course, not that gay issues should have been at the top of anyone's agenda with all of the other things going on, but Obama publicly proclaimed his opposition to same-sex marriage just as loudly as McCain (as well as every other Republican AND Democrat to ever run for president).
I lived in Arizona when then Tempe mayor Neil Guiliano (currently President of GLAAD) came out as a gay man, and Senator McCain was the first one to tell the attack dogs from the religious right to back off and that the mayor's sexual orientation "didn't make a damn bit of difference." He gave a lengthy interview to the Washington Blade, while Barack Obama on multiple occasions refused an interview with a major gay magazine in Philadelphia. Let's also not forget that on two separate occasions, Obama refused to have his picture taken with San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom, who isn't even gay, simply because of Newsom's support for same-sex marriage.
The weekend before the election was Gay Pride Weekend here in Palm Springs. When I attended the festival on Sunday, countless gay men were prancing around proudly while sporting their Obama campaign stickers. Some of the stickers in fact, were even rainbow-colored . . . *GAG*
I couldn't help but shake my head and think to myself, "If they only knew . . . "
However, the encouraging thing is that just over one out of every four gay and lesbian voters DID know, and it's great to see people in our community who refused to be intimidated by the renegade gay activists into allowing their sexual orientation to do their thinking and voting for them.
"Exit polls show Sen. John McCain received at least 1.3 million votes from gay and lesbian Americans—more than any other Republican Presidential candidate has ever received. He garnered 27% of the LGBT vote, an increase from 19% support for President Bush four years ago."
This does not surprise me, since John McCain was the most gay-friendly GOP candidate ever to run for the presidency. Even though McCain lost the election, I felt so blessed to connect with so many other gay men across the nation (mainly young, bright and ambitious like myself) who were also proud McCain supporters, scoffing at the idea, espoused by so many other gay men without batting an eye, that they are automatically obligated to vote Democrat because of their sexual orientation. Many of us work just as hard for our money as everyone else, and are thus just as horrified at the thought of the government taking even more of that hard-earned money that it already does, and "redistributing" it to people who have done absolutely nothing to deserve yet another free handout at taxpayer expense. We were also impressed with McCain's pledge to take a hard-line stance toward the Islamofacist regime in Iran, a regime which publicly executes teenagers as young as 15 who are caught in "homosexual acts." And of course, not that gay issues should have been at the top of anyone's agenda with all of the other things going on, but Obama publicly proclaimed his opposition to same-sex marriage just as loudly as McCain (as well as every other Republican AND Democrat to ever run for president).
I lived in Arizona when then Tempe mayor Neil Guiliano (currently President of GLAAD) came out as a gay man, and Senator McCain was the first one to tell the attack dogs from the religious right to back off and that the mayor's sexual orientation "didn't make a damn bit of difference." He gave a lengthy interview to the Washington Blade, while Barack Obama on multiple occasions refused an interview with a major gay magazine in Philadelphia. Let's also not forget that on two separate occasions, Obama refused to have his picture taken with San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom, who isn't even gay, simply because of Newsom's support for same-sex marriage.
The weekend before the election was Gay Pride Weekend here in Palm Springs. When I attended the festival on Sunday, countless gay men were prancing around proudly while sporting their Obama campaign stickers. Some of the stickers in fact, were even rainbow-colored . . . *GAG*
I couldn't help but shake my head and think to myself, "If they only knew . . . "
However, the encouraging thing is that just over one out of every four gay and lesbian voters DID know, and it's great to see people in our community who refused to be intimidated by the renegade gay activists into allowing their sexual orientation to do their thinking and voting for them.
More "Joe the Plumber" Drama
Ohio Official on Leave Over Joe the Plumber Probe
Friday, November 7, 2008 11:58 PM
Ohio's governor placed an agency director on leave Friday, saying the step was necessary because a state computer or state e-mail account may have been used to assist in political fundraising.
Helen Jones-Kelley, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, had been questioned over records checks made on a man who became known as "Joe the Plumber" during the presidential campaign, but a spokesman for Gov. Ted Strickland said that was not the reason she was put on paid administrative leave.
Strickland said in a statement that Jones-Kelley was placed on paid administrative leave because of the possibility a state computer or state e-mail account was used to assist in political fundraising. The Democrat provided no details on the political fundraising in question. He said Cabinet Secretary Jan Allen has been asked to serve as acting director of the agency.
A home telephone listing for Jones-Kelley could not be found in the Columbus area.
Ohio Republican Party Deputy Chairman Kevin DeWine said in a statement released Friday night that the governor's administration has apparently turned the state government into a "political party machine."
"The Strickland administration has already demonstrated a profound and reckless disregard for personal privacy, and now they're apparently abusing government resources to raise political contributions," DeWine said.
Jones-Kelley has acknowledged that she approved a records check on Samuel J. Wurzelbacher just after the Oct. 15 presidential debate where he became known nationwide as Joe the Plumber. Wurzelbacher, a Toledo-area man, ultimately endorsed GOP presidential nominee John McCain and campaigned with him in Ohio.
The records were never made public or released to the media. Jones-Kelley has said such checks were routinely conducted when someone suddenly emerges in the limelight. State Inspector Tom Charles is investigating whether she improperly authorized the search.
Strickland said he has asked Charles to include the political fundraising matter in his current investigation.
Republican lawmakers — including state Senate President Bill Harris — have questioned Jones-Kelley's actions. State Rep. Bill Batchelder urged Strickland, a Democrat, to put Jones-Kelley on leave until Charles' investigation is complete.
"No Ohioan should be subject to a 'witch hunt' on the whim of a public official," Batchelder said in a statement.
Wurzelbacher, meanwhile, has paid a nearly $1,200 tax bill, according to court documents filed in Toledo on Thursday. Wurzelbacher has said he didn't know he had a tax lien against him until reporters looked into his background.
Friday, November 7, 2008 11:58 PM
Ohio's governor placed an agency director on leave Friday, saying the step was necessary because a state computer or state e-mail account may have been used to assist in political fundraising.
Helen Jones-Kelley, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, had been questioned over records checks made on a man who became known as "Joe the Plumber" during the presidential campaign, but a spokesman for Gov. Ted Strickland said that was not the reason she was put on paid administrative leave.
Strickland said in a statement that Jones-Kelley was placed on paid administrative leave because of the possibility a state computer or state e-mail account was used to assist in political fundraising. The Democrat provided no details on the political fundraising in question. He said Cabinet Secretary Jan Allen has been asked to serve as acting director of the agency.
A home telephone listing for Jones-Kelley could not be found in the Columbus area.
Ohio Republican Party Deputy Chairman Kevin DeWine said in a statement released Friday night that the governor's administration has apparently turned the state government into a "political party machine."
"The Strickland administration has already demonstrated a profound and reckless disregard for personal privacy, and now they're apparently abusing government resources to raise political contributions," DeWine said.
Jones-Kelley has acknowledged that she approved a records check on Samuel J. Wurzelbacher just after the Oct. 15 presidential debate where he became known nationwide as Joe the Plumber. Wurzelbacher, a Toledo-area man, ultimately endorsed GOP presidential nominee John McCain and campaigned with him in Ohio.
The records were never made public or released to the media. Jones-Kelley has said such checks were routinely conducted when someone suddenly emerges in the limelight. State Inspector Tom Charles is investigating whether she improperly authorized the search.
Strickland said he has asked Charles to include the political fundraising matter in his current investigation.
Republican lawmakers — including state Senate President Bill Harris — have questioned Jones-Kelley's actions. State Rep. Bill Batchelder urged Strickland, a Democrat, to put Jones-Kelley on leave until Charles' investigation is complete.
"No Ohioan should be subject to a 'witch hunt' on the whim of a public official," Batchelder said in a statement.
Wurzelbacher, meanwhile, has paid a nearly $1,200 tax bill, according to court documents filed in Toledo on Thursday. Wurzelbacher has said he didn't know he had a tax lien against him until reporters looked into his background.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)