Was Willie Horton Gay?

• subscribe to print magazine

• stay in touch with our email newsletter

  Subscribe to our regular weekly e-mail newsletter. It's packed with updates on recent and upcoming stories, events, campaigns and things every progressive should be informed about.

   

• email this article to a friend

  Your Name Your Email Recipient Email

  Personal message Thought you might be interested in this article from In These Times.

   

  Please help us prevent spam by verifying the word you see in the image above

  Send to multiple recipients. Just separate each email address with a comma.

• Reader Comments (10)

  Page 1 of 1 pages

  “brutally racist black-and-white ads”

  C’mon, you are killing me!

  How is it “ironic” that Cheney’s daughter is gay?

  Posted by Nus on Feb 9, 2004 at 8:21 PM

  It is not surprising that the Bush administration would attempt to use such a tactic. That a father (Cheney) would support a homophobic constitutional amendment when his own daughter is homosexual points rather clearly to the true morals and values of some members of today’s GOP. Bush, Cheney, et al., have shown themselves to be unfeeling, unsympathetic, and primarily concerned with their own biases and prejudices rather than the best interests of the nation.

  The spirit of the US constitution is about *freedom*, about *liberty*—not about restricting and vilifying people based on race, religion, OR sexual preference.

  Regardless of one’s opinion concerning homosexuality—it is unconscionable that Rove and the administration would attempt to divert the nation’s attention from more immediately important issues by stirring up fear and prejudice.

  Posted by sms on Feb 10, 2004 at 2:49 AM

  What else would you expect from these lying bunch of looters of the the public domain and the planet’s resources, not to mention the attempt to destroy the separation of church and state.  If Bush wants to find evil in the world he need not look far.
  Rove and the GOP appear to be masters of this sort of divisive “wedge politics”.  The trouble with the Democrats appears to be the way they present their cause.  It has worked poorly in most elections.  YOu have to counter their smears, distractions with truth and relevance.  The focus needs to be on the mishandling of Iraq, lies, incompetence, crony capitalism, etc.  If the Democrats let them get away with this it will be their own fault.
   

  Posted by Lee Miller on Feb 10, 2004 at 6:20 AM

  Do people honestly believe that the biggest threat to the American nation is being committed in the bedroom between two consenting adults?  Wait…do Bush and Ashcroft plan in a bedroom?  If so, I take it all back, the biggest threat to America is being committed between two consenting adults, perhaps in the Lincoln bedroom.
      To paraphrase George Carlin, you’d think a group of anti-abortion conservatives and homosexuals would make natural allies, who has less abortions than homosexuals?

  Posted by Nate Harris on Feb 10, 2004 at 2:17 PM

  So you think that an elected official who stands by viewpoint he supported in order to be elected rather than allowing personal, familial circumstances to sway that espoused viewpoint is “primarily concerned with their own biases and prejudices rather than the best interests of the nation.”?

  Got to tell you, seems just the opposite to me.

  Posted by Nus on Feb 10, 2004 at 9:52 PM

  As a psychotherapist I have worked with sex offenders.  One of the things I discovered about us humans is that we have an amazing ability to justify our actions and believe what we want.  I remember talking to offenders who would tell me they did nothing wrong.  At first I thought just telling them they had been wrong would be enough.  However, over time I began to see that they actually believed what they were telling me.  One said to me that “She wanted it.  She would come into the room, wearing just a little night gown, sit on my lap, and wriggle around.”  I explained that she was 3 years old and did not mean anything sexual by her behavior.  He still maintained that it was what she wanted.  I finally began to understand that he had convinced himself that it was true inspite of the knowledge that she was a child.  I think the same principle applies with this president.  I think he has convinced himself that his actions are good and that we just do not understand.  It took quite a lot of work on my part to understand how to work with offenders.  I had to see that we all have the ability to justify our actions no matter how odd they may seem to others.  I then had to hold the offenders accountable for their actions.  But I also had to see that they truly had convinced themselves that they were right.  If you look at the actions of GW, you will see that he consistantly offends us and then sees himself as being justified in doing so.  He is not a sex offender, but he is a political offender.  That is how he can sound somewhat convincing when asked about his policies.  He actually believes his own lies. 

  Posted by Michele Nichols on Feb 11, 2004 at 2:44 PM

  Michele,
  Your analogy is scary and true.  We need to look no further than the Tim Russert interview. GW is pathetic.

  Posted by Pat on Feb 11, 2004 at 3:07 PM

  Do you seriously believe that George H. W. Bush’s campaign seized on the Willie Horton issue strictly for racial reasons?  In my opinion, Lee Atwater would have done the same thing if Willie Horton had been Caucasian.  The political point against Dukakis was that he was soft on crime, as witnessed by his agreeing to furloughs for convicted murderers.  This is not to say that race had nothing to do with the issue, but I suspect that some African-Americans would have agreed that Willie Horton should not have been granted his furlough.

  One point that everyone seems to miss is that Willie Horton had been granted several prior furloughs, and had never gotten into trouble on any of those - or at least, he wasn’t caught!  For some reason, Dukakis never raised this point in defense of his judgment to grant the furlough.  And, of course, Bush and Atwater never enlightened the American people on this point either.

  Sincerely,

  John F. Bradley

  Posted by John F. Bradley on Feb 12, 2004 at 11:47 PM

  In the 1988 Democratic primary season, I was still a Jackson supporter—none of the others were even vaguely progressive. I was certainly no fan of the neoliberal MA gov.

  Still, when the Willie Horton attacks on Dukakis started—by Al Gore—I was appalled. I knew Gore was DLC, but this seemed a bit much even from them.

  I suppose I was naive. 8 years of Clinton pretty much brought to where I know there’s NOTHING the DLC wouldn’t do for their own advantage, and with as far as they are to the ight-authoritarian end of the scale, most of the slimiest stuff is perfectly consistent with their political philosophy and record of governance.

  Atwater was certainly a slime-ball, and the Horton bit was particularly slimy. But never forget who he picked it up from: Al Gore.

  Posted by nasrudin on Feb 13, 2004 at 8:45 AM

  It must be a sign of the Apocalypse, because I agree completely with a Nus post….

  Posted by Aaron on Feb 26, 2004 at 8:48 PM

  Page 1 of 1 pages

• register a new account »Posting Security

  To participate in our forums, please register for a free account.

  Username Password

    Remember me
  

  Retreive lost password »

Also by Harvey Wasserman

• Was Willie Horton Gay?