Cudahy Ald. Justin Moralez, who’s running as a Republican in an attempt to unseat incumbent State Rep. Chris Sinicki here in the 20th Assembly district, recently received the endorsement of the Log Cabin Republicans, the nation’s original and largest organization representing gay conservatives and their allies.
Here’s their endorsement.
Moralez is a proud and vocal advocate for the rights of the LGBT community. His bold support for civil rights for all citizens he will represent will bring the fresh Republican leadership Madison needs. Justin Moralez is the right choice for Wisconsin and the 20th Assembly District. Log Cabin Republicans of Wisconsin President Devin R. Gatton said this about Moralez:
“Justin has impressed Log Cabin Republicans with every meeting. His support of the LGBT community is unquestionable and we know he will continue that support in the future. We look forward to the day we can call him Rep. Moralez, and further the rights and freedoms of all Wisconsinites.”
While it’s nice to see a Republican who isn’t an out-and-out bigot when it comes to marriage equality, I can’t help but think the endorsement of Justin Moralez by the Log Cabin Republicans will do more harm than good in a Republican primary, given the desire for conservative ideological purity that seems to be so pervasive in Republican primary races.
9 thoughts on “Justin Moralez endorsed by Log Cabin Republicans”
This is a false narrative anymore. The party is rapidly changing their positions on this issue and the social “conservative” dinosaurs, who once convinced the GOP they were needed, are dying out rapidly. Accept and promote the change, push for it, actively endorse it, and help the GOP accept LGBT rights, as we do. Otherwise, you aren’t for LGBT rights, you are for a Democratic majority only, which is counterproductive to the LGBT community
Devin, don’t get me wrong – I’m glad to see Justin embracing marriage equality.
However, until the tide fully shifts within the Republican Party (and you and I both know it hasn’t yet), there’s a strong likelihood his beliefs on marriage equality will hurt him in a primary that promises to be a race to the right.
I disagree with you. I’ve met with Justin a number of times, he has a proven past on LGBT rights, and he is doing more in the future, including the passage of a gender-identity friendly non-discrimination policy in Cudahy. Further, Justin is an excellent spokesmen for the GOP to help usher in a new, younger, and more LGBT friendly era. It takes people like Justin to help do this, and he is just one of a few candidates running which have earned our endorsement, which is not given on a whim in Wisconsin. 2014 has been the year of the Gay (friendly) conservative, and I don’t see why that won’t stop now. Cheers to him, and I truly believe he is the right candidate for the 20th Assembly District.
I guess you know Republican voters in the 20th district better than I do then, because my sense is that they’re not looking for a moderate.
I didn’t see anything on Justin’s web site about ending the job-killing-government-regulations against marijuana. Where does he stand on that?
I didn’t see anything on Justin’s web site about choice. Does he want the government forcing birth?
Is he a capitalist? Capitalism runs on sales. I’d like to see something on his website such as, “the real ‘job creators,’ are consumers with money to spend.
Those are your opinions that those are the correct way to go. Many millions disagree with you, just as many millions agree with you, but those are conversations to be had. None of those questions pertain to this endorsement nor the reason for this blog.
Please, give me all the Republican arguments for keeping the job-killing-government-pregulations against marijuana. Is it to keep state and local taxes higher?
Can you also do the same for alcohol? If you want job-killing-government-regulations against pot, why not alcohol?
Same with the government forcing birth, I’m keen to hear all the Republican arguments in favor.
John, again, none of which pertains to this conversation. Stay focused.
Thanks for confirming that Justin supports the government forcing birth and that he supports the job-killing-government-regulations against pot. I’ll be sure not to send him any money.
I guess it’s too much to ask Wall Street Republicans to draw on the Eisenhower/Jack Kemp wing of the party to use phrases such as, “economic mobility,” and “broadening the tax base.”
If I didn’t want to “pertain” to the conversation, I’d probably include stuff like this:
Per Modern Monetary Theory #MMT and @wbmosler
“(Federal) Taxes For Revenue Are Obsolete”
“…The necessity for a government to tax in order to maintain both its independence and its solvency is true for state and local governments, but it is not true for a national government. Two changes of the greatest consequence have occurred in the last twenty-five years which have substantially altered the position of the national state with respect to the financing of its current requirements.
The first of these changes is the gaining of vast new experience in the management of central banks.
The second change is the elimination, for domestic purposes, of the convertibility of the currency into gold…”
“Four Reasons to see Washington’s deficit as your surplus”
Wall Street’s already figured this out: “Bank Of America Dumps $75 Trillion In Derivatives On U.S. Taxpayers With Federal Approval”
To put $75 trillion in perspective, US GDP in 2012 was around $16.5 trillion. We blew a lot more than the $6 trillion they’re claiming in Iraq and Afghanistan. Social Security’s Trust Fund is around $2.3 trillion. Bank of America is just one Wall Street bank. They all have derivative exposure. I’ve seen estimates of $700 trillion, but I don’t think anyone knows.
Please note, when Gov. Palin, President Obama, Glenn Beck, Bill Clinton, Paul Ryan, Cenk Ugur, President Reagan all use the identical talking points https://www.dropbox.com/s/ujoc76aojso16dt/debt%20video%202%20min.mp4 , when all push the same falsehoods about the federal deficit, is it too much to ask Republicans to pay attention?
Republicans are right. We need a FULL holiday brought back immediately on the payroll tax and much, much lower federal income and corporate taxes on the 99%. Dems are right. We need a lot more federal spending on health care, education, and green infrastructure.
One of the corner stones of the Republican party has been local control. If all you want to do is slash state and local taxes/fees, you LOSE local and State control. You cede MORE power to the FEDERAL government.
How’s my focus?
Comments are closed.