Gay Republicans does not quite succeed in unearthing substantial, palpable understanding of Log Cabin Republicans. But in simply chronicling their support of Bush's second presidential term, which the Texas Governor subsequently betrayed, we follow a handful of homosexual Republicans and their reactions to their Party's exploitation of their sexuality for the sake of evangelical voters who amass far more votes than them. That in itself was an eye-opener for me. What we see is how the LCRs have been led with their noses by the Bush administration, who rubbed shoulders with them whenever they needed their votes and support and announced the prospects of marriage amendments to rob them of their rights as people when they found that the evangelicals were much more advantageous for them to maintain on their side.
I suppose I am disappointed that I still don't feel I understand why a gay man who grew up repressed by the Mormonism of his background would maintain a significant penchant for the Republican Party, all throughout the Reagan years and Bush 41, in the face of how the military recruited him only to discharge him for his sexuality in order to make an example of him, or how Reagan showed remarkable disdain for the AIDS epidemic and perpetuated the myth that it was a seclusively gay disease. A down-to-earth lesbian speaks of feeling all alone at Republican Conventions, and is in a swamp of confusion and indecision between whether or not to continue supporting Bush after his betrayal of thousands of voters. These two particular subjects are the smarter ones. There is an unbearably stupid and repugnant LCR who rails against any doubt voiced by the rest of his constituency members, constantly talking over them and making fun of them, seeming intent on not hearing what they are saying as it would diminish his tightly wound delusions which he uses to justify his propaganda. Aside from the instances in which he infuriates the viewer as much as nearly every fellow homosexual, there is a moment in which I laughed out loud at his complete ignorance: He presents to the camera his collection of Bush dolls, which to him are a symbol of his idolization of the man, unaware of the fact they are products designed to mock the president's poor English and goofy facial expressions.
I do feel that I understand why a Palm Beach LCR chronicled in the film is an adamant Republican. There is not one moment in which he fails to be an unabashed snob, saying that Gay Pride Parades are so beneath him, that other LCRs who are upset by Bush's proposal to ban gay marriage should get over themselves, that you're a Republican if you're smart. He constantly praises Palm Beach for being extremely moneyed, and even tries to coerce his Moderate mother to move there for that very reason. My feeling was that perhaps his mother's Moderate position is because of him in that she may agree with some Republican views but does not want to support anti-gay legislation. If so, what irony. Clearly though, this Palm Beach walking tan is a fiscal conservative whose core concern is tax breaks for his upper-class status. He is distinct from the previously mentioned ignoramus in that he is difficult to read. There is an ulterior motive to his political views, but does he honestly believe his own crap which he lathers on top of his mission to sustain the vain privileges of his financial position?
Gay Republicans gives us the pain of being a fish out of water, reinforced hatred and inarguable deceit of the Bush administration, and frankly the strange duality of gullibility and stubbornness in these folks. And it makes you very angry. If this 62-minute doc can make me as angry as it did, I cannot imagine being a gay person watching these misinformed, perplexing and disaffecting people. The film obviously shows us that they are not all stupid, but it also seems to show us that none of them really seem that smart. Many gay Liberals, which I would imagine to be a natural redundancy, are interviewed and claim that a gay Republican is like a Jewish Nazi or a black Klansman. Well, whether a gay Republican sees it that way or not
aren't they?
