Michael Boyajian, loony liberal algorithm

by Ferdinand Bardamu on October 12, 2010

in Politics

Michael Boyajian, the idiot I mentioned in this morning’s post as claiming Carl Paladino wants gays to be “kept down much in the same way blacks were in South Africa during Apartheid” has decided to go for broke. Ready your facepalms for this piece he published earlier today entitled “Gay Apartheid and the Paladino Conundrum“:

A reader recently challenged my assertion that Republican gubernatorial candidate Carl Paladino was advocating a form of Apartheid for the gay community. You see that is just the thing with Paladino and his supporters.  They say one thing, then back track, then forward track and in the end mean just what they originally stated.  In this case they made homophobic remarks and then denied they were homophobes in a form of circular logic and that is the Paladino conundrum.  It is the riddle of what he truly stands for other than profits through government rents and tax breaks.

The reader thought himself an expert on Apartheid yet what he did not know was that I studied Apartheid under the foremost authority on the practice, Professor Williams of Stony Brook University while Apartheid still existed in South Africa.  The whys and wherefores of the practice all come into focus when you come to understand that the entire purpose of the separateness system was according to Williams, “to keep blacks down, hunched over looking at the ground,” forbidden to even gaze upon a white person.  It is a form of racial superiority much the same as is Paladino’s heterosexual orthodoxy over members of the gay community.

And that is exactly the views of Paladino that gays are “dysfunctional” and therefore not part of the mainstream society. That gay pride parades are “disgusting” and should be out of sight of heterosexuals and that children should be kept away from gay people while being taught it is not a “valid lifestyle option.”

That my friends is what we call de facto Apartheid where gays are to be kept away from the dominant heterosexual culture yet still allowed to exist and that is all they are to be allowed is to exist invisible to the rest of us in the words of Ralph Ellison.

You dunce. Apartheid specifically put blacks in separate bantustans and forced them to live under a separate set of laws that disadvantaged them. Paladino hasn’t proposed anything of the sort. He said that he was willing to “live and let live” so long as gays stopped their flaming craziness and re-joined the Family of Man. Clearly, your mentor was as dumb as you.

And don’t try and claim that saying that gay pride parades are inappropriate for public display is somehow restricting the rights of gays. There’s no such thing as a “heterosexual culture” or a homosexual culture. “Gay culture” as we think of it has existed for less than forty years, a byproduct of the Sexual Revolution. It has about as much cultural legitimacy as redneck jokes. A bunch of nearly-naked men marching down a major city street beating each other with riding crops and wearing makeup is not a legitimate expression of culture, any more than a group of married dudes finger-fucking their wives on a giant vagina float would be an expression of culture. For the past three decades, gays have basically been doing this to straight people:

As the man said, we’re mad as hell and we’re not taking it anymore. And in case you forgot, there’s way more of us then there are of you.

Well, we straight allies refuse to subscribe to this Apartheid and we embrace gays and their lifestyles and their wish for inclusion and marriage equality.  In my world we are all one, in Paladino’s we are all separate and apart and unequal and angry.  You chose the world you want to live in.

Keep poking that elephant, son. Just keep it up.

In related news, Governor Paterson has joined the pile-on, and Paladino has succumbed to the pressure. The gay mafia may have won another battle, but they’re running scared.

{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Esmeralda Eskandarian October 12, 2010 at 7:15 pm

Another example why I can’t stand the gay rights movement.

2 raliv October 12, 2010 at 8:27 pm

excellent lebowski reference.

3 Advocatus Diaboli October 12, 2010 at 8:53 pm

Ok, so the liberal guy is making a mountain out of a mole hill, but does NY state not have more pressing and urgent socio-economic problems than speedo clad gay guys shaking their packages in public?

The problem with CONservatives is that they spend too much time on issues of taste and morality as opposed to getting useful things done.

4 Snark October 13, 2010 at 4:53 am

“In this case they made homophobic remarks and then denied they were homophobes in a form of circular logic”

Apparently the invocation of ‘circular logic’ is now a thought-terminating cliche. It doesn’t matter if circular logic was actually used or not (it wasn’t).

5 The Blanque October 13, 2010 at 10:13 am

I think Kathy Shaidle said it best: “Dear Gays, this is why people hate you. Your welcome.”

6 Sparks123 October 13, 2010 at 3:08 pm

Response from the previous related thread:

[People have been saying the same thing for years, and yet the extremist Tea Partiers are on track to annex the Republican Party and have a huge role in the next Congress. "Moderate" rhetoric has been why the GOP has been on a four-year losing streak.]

The GOP under Bush took conservative positions on social issues and expanded the size of government. I don’t think anyone would say would say that the Republican defeats in 2006 and 2008 were because they didn’t attack gays enough. The Tea Party has emphasized a small government agenda while playing down social issues. TARP, the stimulus and Obamacare will be a much bigger motivating factor this year than gay marriage ever was in 2004.

As an example, in Pennsylvania, Pat Toomey and Rick Santorum have had similar voting records, but because Santorum emphasized social issues, he got crushed in 2006 while Toomey will likely win.

[We're living in interesting times. The fact that this "intemperate jerk" could bitchslap an establishment candidate in a primary for a major race means change is afoot.]

Winning a primary is a different skill-set from winning a general election, especially against someone as incompetent as Rick Lazio.

7 Kilroy October 13, 2010 at 8:22 pm

Simple question to Boyajian:

When is it not “homophobic” to criticise or opposes on principle: homosexuals, their “culture” and impact on social welfare?

Leave a Comment

{ 2 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: