Thursday, September 10, 2009

Everyone Wants to Know, "Is Markos Moulitsas Gay?"

My site meter hit counter tells me that many people are coming to this blog wanting to know if Markos C. Alberto Moulitsas Zúñiga is gay or not. Let me tell you, first of all, that it's much more important to know that he spent two years working and training at the CIA between 2001 and 2003, by his own account. Compared to that, how much difference does it really make whether he is gay or not, unless you're hoping to get with him at the next Netroots Nation?

I'd rather spend the afternoon naked in a sauna surrounded by forty gay men than spend ten minutes surrounded by forty CIA agents. How about you? Which would YOU choose? I'd rather be jailed for soliciting gay sex than picked up by the CIA for "questioning" at a secret site in Turkey. I'd rather spend the afternoon with sixty gay men dressed as cowboys than spend the afternoon surrounded by officers from NYPD. How about you? In other words, I'm much more concerned about Moulitsas' connection to the CIA than whether he likes to be on top or on the bottom (if at all).

Unlike Markos Moulitsas, I'm not desperately afraid of gay people (see below), which is a characterstic, studies show, associated with a secret arousal by, and desire for, gay sex.

Anyhow, the reason people want to know if Markos Moulitsas is gay is that they want to know what level of hypocrisy he was demonstrating when he wrote and published this letter at his college newspaper:
Published on Monday, January 25, 1993
It's truly disturbing how much ado has been made over Bill Clinton's campaign promise to lift the ban on homosexuals from the U.S. military. It's ironic how it has taken a president who has never served in the military to make a promise that affects the military in such a negative manner.

Those who have served in the military, such as myself, understand the demands and pressures of military life are incompatible with allowing integration with homosexuals. I'm neither socially conservative or prejudiced, and neither is liberal columnist Mike Royko, Gen. Colin Powell, and influential liberal Democrats Sam Nunn and Les Aspin, all who've come out against lifting the ban.

Under military circumstances, as much has to be done as possible to focus the unit's mission and keep disciplinary problems to a minimum. Worrying about whether the known homosexual sleeping next to you is watching as you change your underwear may seem trivial as you read this, but to the soldier who's short-tempered after three weeks in the field and four hours of daily sleep, it becomes a matter of great importance to his pride and sensibilities. And in any case, there aren't many people who would change clothes in a group of co-workers if members of the opposite sex were in the same room watching. There is something inherently uncomfortable about it.

Such fears would go a long way in disrupting efficiency and morale in a unit.



I recently read of study that concluded that if you put electrodes on the penises of gay men and straight men and men who viscerally hate gays, the men who viscerally hate gays are also the men whose penises become most engorged when they see movies of men having sex with other men. In other words, the men who think they are most anti-gay are the men who would most like to engage in gay sex, but they hate gays (and themselves) for wanting to get down with another man.

If Markos Moultisas is gay, then he is also the worst sort of Sen. Larry Craig "wide-stance" hypocrite for writing the above letter, condemning other people for being part of a group of which Markos Moulitsas also was a member: gay people. To insist that you can't stand being around gay people when it is YOU who are looking at THEIR underwear would be the worst kind of self-deception and self-hate imagineable.

And if that is who and how Markos Moulitsas is, then why the hell are so many people so eager follow him and ask him to define what it means to be "progressive", "liberal" or "leftist" when the above letter shows him to be rigid, insensitive, absurdly self-conscious, homophobic, and adverse to diversity?

If this letter were the only example of this inside view of Markos Moulitsas' mind, then we could dismiss it as a momentary aberration. But, when we read the absurd article he wrote which he entitled, "The Soldier in Me", and combine that with our knowledge that he spent two years "training" and working with the CIA, (something he has been unwilling to discuss, explain, confirm or deny, since he admitted it in his June 2, 2006 interview at the Commonwealth Club), we can only conclude that this man has to be a CIA asset, infiltrator, or, as he put it, "secret agent".

Personally, I wish the facts just showed Moulitsas to be merely gay, like Congressman Barney Frank. I've collaborated with Congressman Barney Frank on immigration policy and services, and I'm not afraid of entrusting Democratic Party responsibilities and strategies to Congressman Frank. But, I don't trust ANYONE, ANYWHERE who spent two years training at the CIA. I agree with truthout1020 at YouTube, who said, "Once CIA, Always CIA".

(Why does Alternet do a biography on Moulitsas, mentioning his military service and his parentage, but not mentioning his well-known Google-searchable connection to the CIA? They must be part of the official farce, right, that tries to make a CIA agent into the leader of (guiless) "progressives". With over a million hits for Kos + CIA at Google, why didn't Alternet include that information (or issue) in their biography? I'll tell you why. Many of us progressives are being played like a cheap guitar.)

I think Congressman Barney Frank is "crashing the gates" of the Democratic Party much more usefully as gay man self-acknowledged, compared to Markos Moulitsas "crashing the gates" of the Democratic Party as a CIA-trained (ex?) agent, (ex?) Republican, (ex?) homophobe, who is connected to right wing groups in El Salvador, who will not state whether he benefits financially or not from his family's destruction of the Jaltepeque Estuary, in greater San Salvador, El Salvador.

If anyone has any information (aside from the above letter) indicating that Moulitsas is (or is not) a homophobic gay hypocrite, then please add it to the comments below.


socrates said...

Hi Francis, I tried some time ago to see if there were any other student articles written by Moulitsas, and it didn't seem like any were available for perusal. I think there must be tons of other stuff showing his true ideology. I believe he is an Arianna Huffington type, one who cares more about themselves than about society. So depending on how the winds are blowing, that's where you'll find such posers. I think this slant also explains why he resides in Berkeley. I think that was a calculated move in creating his fake image of being a progressive. As for him being gay, I totally agree with you that the bigger story is about his ties to the CIA. If he is homosexual, then it is of the latent variety. We know from the pie wars or whatever that was about, that he has a misogynist streak. That is another characteristic of latent homosexuals, a deep-seated hatred of women. As for his writing ability, can anyone link to one thing he's written that's been acclaimed or showed even a hint of talent? I doubt it. When someone this mediocre rises to the top, it represents even more circumstantial evidence that such a social climb has not been organic. I have been a liberal type since 18 even younger. How many people change from liberal to conservative or vice versa like he and Arianna have in their later ages? If anything, folks are said to tend to become more conservative as they age. The thing to me about Kos is this. To this day he clings to the story of seeing innocent people murdered by El Salvadoran communists. Yet, anyone who has even a smidgen of awareness of historical facts knows that the story of El Salvador was about right wing death squads. So now we have an alleged progressive praising the CIA as a liberal institution who continues to cover up the truth about right wing death squads. The more time goes on, the more my opinion is evolving to thinking Markos Moulitsas is some form of intelligence worker. I mean, that interview with the Commonwealth Club was from just a few years ago. In short, diarrhea of the mouth has led to his own downfall.

Francis L. Holland Blog said...

All of Moulitsas articles posted at the Northern Star seem to be available in the archives now, unless they've scrubbed some that I'm not aware of. The http addresses have all been changed, so that links made prior to September 2007 no longer work. Articles with the old links need to be updated.

Now, he claims that he was an important Latino leader at Northern Illinois University, but there is no evidence of that whatsover in the NIU archives. The only evidence available directly contradicts his claim, in an article he wrote that said that anti-Latino and anti-Black color aroused antagonism did not affect him because "they could never escape who they were."

To find this article just look to my article entitled, "Markos Moulitsas: A Lifetime of Insensitivity to Democratic Party Constituencies."

Here's the new working link to the original article.

In this article, Moulitsas specifically and clearly disclaims being of any heritage (such as Latino) that would make him a victim of color or langauge aroused antagonism.

I was terribly happy to escape the ugliness of a racist world for the safety of my every day-to-day life. Sure, I could always talk against racism, fight ignorance and prejudice wherever I ran into it, yet I would always be looking in from another room and I could always close the door. My life, in my world, in my own detached selfishness.

And as I left the ugly reality of racism behind, it struck me that what was such an easy and trivial exercise for me would be impossible for anyone whose skin color or religious persuassion made them the target of bigotry and discrimination. They would never be able to escape who they were.

Need Moulitsas say more? He's only a Latino NOW as a defense to being called anti-Latino, or as a rebuttal to those who point out that 1% of readers of DailyKos are Latino. But, he's a white guy in his own mind, and his skin color and facial characteristics enable him to "pass for white".

Anonymous said...

Moulitsas is one of the most stereotypically gay-seeming people in public life. If he is straight, I would be surprised. But someone like that, no matter who he is attracted to, probably went into the military in the first place to convince himself he was masculine and strong, because either he looked in the mirror and realized he was an effeminate wimp or he was made fun of by others for being one. Of course he's going to be homophobic, especially if he can't reconcile his own desire to be a big strong warrior with the reality that he is quite frankly, (I can say this because I'm a homo myself) faggy.

Francis L. Holland Blog said...

"Anonymous", that's the most hilarious and clarifying comment I've seen in quite a while. You really made me laugh with your last sentence.

It makes me feel good that people understand that I'm not attacking MAMZ for perhaps being gay; I'm attacking him (a) for attacking gays and (b) ridiculing gay rights, and (c) ridiculing a Democratic president who was trying to do something courageous for gays, while (d) providing a lot of circumstantial evidence that MAMZ is gay himself, and is a big hypocrite.

The letter itself raises a lot of "inherently uncomfortable" questions about MAMZ's sexuality.

And so he writes a fervently anti-gay letter to his college newspaper in an attempt to ingratiate himself with Republicans and reassert his own flagging sense of heterosexuality, if in fact he ever had any. I think he's a Senator Larry Craig in younger skin, but that opinion is based only on the letter he wrote. I don't claim to have any other evidence of whether he is gay or straight, and I wouldn't care, if only he hadn't written that outrageously homophobic letter, only to claim later that he is a "progressive".

At the same time, let's be real. To really understand a person in America today, in the context of this society, you HAVE to know what their skin color is and whether they are gay or not. Otherwise, you really don't know them and what they think about and what they have to confront.

I know that gay people can identify one another even when heterosexual people have no idea. It's that "gaydar", so thanks for offering readers the benefit of your perception.

It's been a real eye-opener for me to learn that MAMZ considers himself to be a white man, and only trots out the 1/2 Latino background when he's pretending to be an "Up from Poverty" success story.

Thanks for commenting.

Anonymous said...