Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Does it Matter if Markos C. Alberto Moulitsas Zúñiga (MAMZ) is Gay ?

A frequent visitor to this blog who goes by the anonymous name "nikogriego", says:

You are apparently obsessed with this subject [of MAMZ's sexuality]. When will you get off this MAMZ is gay thing? Why should we care whether he is gay? Who are you to label people as being "good gay" or "bad gay"? 

Are you gay yourself? Homophobic? Why should I even care?  It is much more important that MAMZ be revealed as a progressive "gatekeeper" who is working to actively prevent discussion of the events of 9/11/01 by other progressives, and to frustrate attempts to get the truth out. I think you have done a good job of showing that MAMZ is not what he appears to be, but get off the gay thing, please.
I like to please readers with well-sourced and unambiguous information, but this is time when I simply can't please readers, because the question has not been conclusively answered.  I have NEVER said that MAMZ is conclusively gay.  But the "truth about Kos" is that half of the hits to this blog come from people using Google to find out whether MAMZ is gay or not. Like the question of whether MAMZ is presently employed by the CIA, MAMZ himself refuses to answer this simple question, preferring ambiguity.

Remarkably, MAMZ once got a Republican journalist and operative fired by outing him as possibly gay.  The Washington Post said at the time,
Online Reporter Quits After Liberals' Expose
By Howard Kurtz

Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 10, 2005; Page C04

The conservative reporter who asked President Bush a loaded question at a news conference last month resigned yesterday after liberal bloggers uncovered his real name and raised questions about his background.

Jeff Gannon, who had been writing for the Web sites Talon News and GOPUSA, is actually James Dale Guckert, 47, and has been linked to online domain addresses with sexually provocative names.

He has been under scrutiny since asking Bush how he could work with Senate Democratic leaders "who seem to have divorced themselves from reality." The information about Gannon was posted on the liberal sites Daily Kos, Atrios and World o' Crap.

Under the headline "A Voice of the New Media: The Voice Goes Silent," Gannon wrote on his personal Web page that because of the attention "I find it is no longer possible to effectively be a reporter for Talon News" and that he is quitting "in consideration of the welfare of me and my family." Gannon added in a brief interview that "my family has been victimized" and that he wanted to "put some separation between Talon News and the White House."

Gannon's resignation highlights the no-holds-barred atmosphere of the Web, which both enabled him to function as a reporter -- his stories appeared on a site founded by Texas Republican activist Bobby Eberle -- and produced a swarm of critics determined to expose him.

Among the domain names registered by Gannon's company several years ago, but never launched, were Hotmilitarystud.com, Militaryescorts.com and Militaryescortsm4m.com, along with Exposejessejackson.com. The bloggers also have linked to a since-withdrawn America Online photo of a man who appears to be Gannon, posing in his underwear, with a screen name bearing the initials "JDG."
I find it remarkably ironic that MAMZ presents himself as gay-neutral in 2010 after being absolutely opposed to being in the presence of gays in 1993, and then ruining the career of a possibly gay GOP journalist by bringing that man's sexuality into question.

It fits a pattern of MAMZ creating a new and profoundly ironic and literally incredible narrative for his life, including rewriting his past, even to the extent of lying about which country he was born in, and often including bold-faced lies, like the assertion that he was "an immigrant to the United States" when he was actually born in Chicago.  For people like MAMZ, no lie is too large to be told with a straight face. 

I also write about MAMZ's sexuality because the public wants to read about it. Once they're here at this blog, there are obviously many other more important issues about MAMZ that readers can peruse, aside from this CIA-trained homophobic politician's sexuality and his manhood.

A whole book could be written analyzing what MAMZ has said about his sexuality and his once-shaky manhood.  I think this is an important issue, since MAMZ wants to "crash the gates" of the Democratic Party and choose the party's leaders.  This is in a Party that wins 90% of Blacks' votes in presidential elections, while DailyKos has 3% Black readership and even less Black participation.  I think the Party has a right to know something about the blogger whose blog participants were so idiotically pro-John Edwards in 2006 and 2007.  Just read the comments to my anti-Edwards blog post at DailyKos for proof of how much these idiots thought nominating John Hunter Reille Edwards would be a good idea!

Does MAMZ hate gays because he is a homophobic heterosexual or because he is a homosexual homophobic? I want an answer to that from this man who proposes to "crash the gates" of the Democratic Party and he has made ambiguous statements that rightfully leave the public wondering about his sexuality and how he feels about gays.

Since MAMZ once drove a possibly gay man out of his employment by outing him, that's plenty of reason to wonder out loud about MAMZ's own sexuality, taken in the context of 1993 letter saying he couldn't stand being around gays.  I think that one letter is perhaps the single most interesting and self-revealing thing he has said or written, even compared with all he has said since the period when the CIA trained him while he was starting DailyKos.

As for my own sexuality, I've experimented, but all of my three marriages have been with women.


nikogriego said...

Thank you for referencing my comment and building another article around it. Your answer appears to be that you keep up the gay thing because it draws people to your site, and then you can present to them other evidence regarding MAMZ and his real persona. For me it remains over the top-and labeling people as "good gay" or "bad gay" is weird. And I don't care about your sexuality or his; I do like the fact that you attempt to expose him as a left-wing gatekeeper phony. I wish you would do an article showing how he refuses to allow any discussion of 9-11 on his site, and specifically removes references thereto, and then see how many hits you get for that. I think your comments would be a bit livelier as well.

Francis L. Holland said...


If you want to write an article about the 9-11 stuff I'll be more than happy to print it here. My gripes with DailyWhitosphere and its owner have been other gripes that are well-known by now.

Frankly, I don't know whether writing about MAMZ and his sexuality helps readership.

I know that the "good gay" / "bad gay" dichotomy is new, but that's my goal as a blogger: to develop new language that says what I want to communicate in shorthand that everyone understands.

Writing about the "good gay" / "bad guy" dichotomy should help readers to understand that I am not writing about MAMZ because of any objection to his sexuality, whatever it is, but rather to point out that he has said in the past that he didn't want to be around any gays.

To me, the good gay/bad gay think is intuitive. My Representative Barney Frank is a "good gay" because he really is progressive in terms of helping immigrants, stopping abusive debit card charges and responding to constituents promptly, using the force of his office and staff to achieve goals for his Congressional district and for America in general.

It's obvious that Sen. Larry Craig and Rep. Foley from Texas were "bad gays" because not only where they entirely right-wing in their voting records, but they didn't acknowledge any staff molestation or extra-marital anonymous sex until it was proved by others.

Bad closeted gays target openly gay people with attempts to block gay rights. Bad gays are vehemently against gay rights because they are so afraid of the homosexual feelings and thoughts that they have that they seek to punish gays as a way of hiding from their own proclivities.

I can call someone a bad gay if I want to while explaining what makes them bad from my perspective. Right-wingers are not likely to accept this dichotomy because they believe ALL gays are "bad gays".

But the term "bad gay" necessarily and implicitly recognizes the possibility and reality that there are "good gays" as well.

What appears weird today, e.g. the "good gay" / "bad gay" dichotomy may seem weird to you today, but don't be surprised if it becomes standard practice across a broad range of people with time. If it makes you stop and think while also helping gays by positing that there are positive and valuable gays, then I'll be content.

Some people are insisting that ALL gays are bad, but I insist that, just as with any other group, there are positive and negative members. When the right wing political groups and church pastors acknowledge that, we will have taken a step forward.

I would think it would be easier to come out as a gay if you know that there are people out there who are not gay, but who nonetheless value good gays and the contributions they make to society.

If you want to come out today, I say to readers, come out as a "good gay" and tell us that you have not persecuted others for being gay, and your politics are consistent with your gender identification. That makes it a lot easier for the rest of us to know such a person is a "good gay."

Francis L. Holland said...

Correction: Rep. Foley was from Florida.

Francis L. Holland said...


If you want something done right, then do it yourself.

I eagerly await your submission of an article exploring why a man who spent 2 years training with the CIA refuses to allow discussion of 9-11 alternative explanations at his blog.
My e-mail address is FrancisLHolland @ Gmail.com, all together with no spaces. I eagerly await your article about MAMZ's policies on 9-11 disbelievers.