Accuracy in Media

Despite the takeover of the House, several high-profile Republicans went down to defeat. One was Carl Paladino, the outspoken and combative New York gubernatorial candidate. He lost to liberal Democrat Andrew Cuomo, who made gay marriage a top priority and dragged his daughters to a 2010 “gay pride” parade in New York. Despite this offensive behavior, it was Paladino who became “controversial” because of his criticism of the homosexuals.

Paladino had initially made correct statements about homosexuality, but homosexuals and their leftist allies came out in force to smear him. Significantly, many in the Republican Party and conservative movement did not bother to defend him. They even said that he made a mistake by “bringing up” the issue, when his comments were a response to Cuomo’s pandering to the gays.

You can view a video montage of the “gay pride” event or you can Google, “‘new york city’ 2010 gay pride” and take a look at the many photographs of the parade. Clearly, Paladino’s initial remarks were correct. The parade was offensive and disgusting.

Ironically (or not), those trying to co-opt the conservative movement were among the best of leftist allies. GOProud—which declared “Homocon 2010” a “complete and total success”—even felt it worthwhile to send GOProud Board Chair Chris Barron on Ed Schultz’s MSNBC television show in order to denounce Paladino and anyone who views homosexuality as wrong. (Paladino later backed down from his comments which earned him a reprieve from GOProud but proved that his conservatism was itself questionable.)

Predictably, Schultz, who had praised communist Van Jones as a “great patriot” during the October 2 “One Nation Working Together” rally, used Paladino’s remarks to accuse the GOP of “homophobia,” which is supposed to be an unwarranted fear of a “lifestyle” that is characterized  by serious health problems that frequently result in disease and death. It’s not homophobia but common sense and concerns for public health that make people recoil from embracing “gay rights.”

Barron’s appearance on Schultz’s show is mildly amusing since the two seemed to have different conversations. (Schultz wanted Barron to denounce Republicans and the right in general, while  Barron attempted to rewrite reality by insisting that morality proponents are trying to steal the Tea Party movement and homosexuals are the “true conservatives” concerned only with “fiscal conservatism.”)

Yet Barron’s appearance on Schultz’s show is outrageous at the same time. GOProud claims to exist because it wants a homosexual group that actually supports the GOP—something GOProud rightfully claims the Log Cabin Republicans do not. But Barron mirrors in substance most everything that Mike Rogers, a “gay activist,” says on Schultz’s show after Barron’s appearance.

GOProud boasts about being the first “gay” group to run an ad against Democrats. But the active undermining of a Republican candidate who initially supported morality, combined with open admittance that “gays” have always previously aligned with the left, should tip off conservatives and the GOP that GOProud is a stealth leftist group. One has to conclude that GOProud is another phony conservative group that wants to transform the GOP into a version of the Democratic Party, at least on moral issues.

The antics of Chris Barron and GOProud make it clear that there is nothing “conservative” about them. While they have to be exposed as the phonies they are, there is an urgent need for conservatives concerned about morality and values to understand why the agenda of the “gay conservatives” has to be exposed and defeated. Consider that:

With the country focused on the increasingly precarious economic and financial situation that faces our nation, it is tempting to ignore the moral decline of America and the accelerating assault on our traditional cultural institutions, such as the family. But the “gay conservatives” who go on shows like that of Ed Schultz have made it clear that they are determined to purge any Republicans from the party who want traditional morality respected and reserved. That means we are in a fight we cannot avoid.

The good news is that reports are emerging that the Tea Party movement, having focused the nation’s attention on the economic crisis, is turning its attention to the moral crisis. They are recognizing that America’s economic strength has to rest on a moral foundation. This is welcome news indeed.

We saw the beginning of the moral re-awakening on November 2 when three Iowa Supreme Court justices who had made a ruling allowing homosexual “marriage” lost their seats in a popular revolt against them. The battle is on. And in the same way that we can save the country economically, we can—and must—save its moral foundations.

Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.


Comments are turned off for this article.