On Friday, I appeared on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow show.
We discussed Delaware’s bizarre and extreme GOP Senate nominee, Christine O’Donnell and her deep roots in the so-called “ex-gay” industry. As the director of The Savior’s Alliance for Lifting the Truth (SALT), she had an ex-gay program led by Wade Richards. He came out of the closet and O’Donnell, like a loving Christian, abandoned him, showing that she is cruel, unforgiving and mean-spirited.
data=”http://www.youtube.com/v/Dvsg6mUso5o&feature?fs=1″>You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video
Fine but Wayne should go on FOX where viewers minds might change.
You know those folks ain’t hardly going to have Wayne on the show anymore unless to interrupt him, talk over him, or just tell him to shut up.
But at least they regularly have opponents on. Rachel and Keith rarely do.
Granted, but the catch phrases—that accurately describe the political “ex-gay” movement—are getting out there.
They’re a confidence-inspiring reminder of the meaning behind them.
Articulation is going to win this war.
Bob:
I’ve been on Hannity’s show and O’Reilly tons of times. Lot’s of YouTube clips of it. As well as Armstrong Williams, Pat Buchanan, Cal Thomas. I’ve been on against Falwell, Christine O’Donnell, etc.
It was nice – for a change – to be on with someone I agree with.
Bob, are you f*****g kidding?
Are you seriously f*****g suggesting that Maddow doesn’t have people on who disagree with her? Are you f*****g kidding? Or are you wasting my goddamned time?
Jesus christ.
Yeah, I mean, come on, the segment even featured Richard Cohen on her show…
Well Wayne: we need 10,000 more of you!!
Bob, really, that’s what you got out of this? He’s already said it but Wayne’s been on Fox. I also don’t think you watch Maddow often. She’s one of the best interviewers out there. When she has people she disagrees with she actually lets them say what they have to say without interrupting them (unlike most Fox hosts). Also, Fox viewers don’t change their minds unless Beck or O’Reilly tell them to.
Great job Wayne. Maddow is one of the few hosts who regularly talks about issues like this.
Yay, Wayne! Thanks for everything that you do.
Wayne, you are simply the best! Thanks for exposing the horrendous b******t of the ex-gay tyranny and stupidity.
Evan, are you married? Because if not, I’m proposing right now. You are wonderful.
On a lighter note-Wayne, I really liked that tie you had on.
I endorse Gary’s comment wholeheartedly. Great tie. Can you wear that to me and Evan’s wedding?
Hey, by the way, I gotta say I love it every time Richard Cohen appears on TV–especially when they show that Paula Zahn interview with him cuddling some poor schmuck and then beating the pillow with a tennis racket. That guy is the best evidence out there that the ex-gay line of b******t is just RIDONCULOUS!!!! He really is a mental case. Hahahahaha!
Wayne,
I have been following you pretty much since you started TWO & I think we all want to thank you for the invaluable service you are doing countering what I think are “nuts” on the other side. And as it goes, both you & Rachel & Mike Rogers “are the greatest!!”,
for demanding proof regarding your subject matter. Most of us have great love & respect for the service that you are doing for our community & for young people questioning things.
Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!
And for the “doubters”, I am sure that Wayne, Rachel & Mike keep an “open invite” to anyone who disagrees with them,,,,but they better have proof when they sit down with these three.
And Wayne, Gary had it right on—great tie.
thanks again
[...] MORE [...]
Wayne – a few short years ago, my ex husband and I did an ad for one of your Truth Wins Out conferences. Our lives were harmed drastically by the ex-gay movement, as well as society’s lack of acceptance for homosexuals. It tore our lives apart, and our daughter struggled for quite some time, too – at 24, I think she still struggles as a result of the lie we were all subjected to. Keep up the good work! And anytime you need someone to talk about the garbage “family values” movement and what it did to us, feel free to contact me.
No, I’m not married.
God, that was a pissy comment I made, though.
Wayne, I am a huge fan of your’s and TWO. Thank you for doing the work. One question – when do you think Christine O’Donnell will come out of her closet???
Evan, I do kinda like Rachel. She is charming and funny. I have seen occasionally a dissenting guest on her show but not as regularly as FOX. And rather than interrupt her guests she does let them go on and on and then uses clips to comment on for days when they are not there to respond.
Keith, on the other hand is neither charming or funny.
Wayne, I watched last night and thought you did very well on Maddow but I only wished she had given you more time.
I am glad to learn you have been on FOX many times. I shall search out the clips.
Daniel, my first comment was not a critique of Wayne’s performance last night. I was unaware he had been on FOX. I don’t watch MSNBC or FOX religiously. I flip between channels but mainly watch CNN. I do find Maddow’s habit of commenting later with parsed clips from her dissenting guests as bothersome as the FOX guy’s constant interruptions.
Bob, Maddow’s comments before and after the interviws are backed up. She doesn’t just make snippy comments with nothing behind them and the guests are always welcome to come back and answer her. And, no, it’s not as bothersome as the constant interruptions because even if she later refutes what the guest says they did get the chance to say it. And, unlike some Fox hosts, she has NEVER told a guest to “shut up.”
Do you really think that after the guest has left she should just let any claims that were false go uncommented on?
Fox viewers don’t change their minds. And on Fox it would be pretty amazing if Wayne was allowed to talk at all. O’Reilly would interrupt him constantly, does Beck even have guests who disagree with him? And the rest of their “news personalities” are little better.
Daniel, I hope you don’t actually believe that Rachel is incapable of mistakes and of being wrong or unfair sometimes. Just because she has data to back up her views does not mean that her data or her interpretation of that data is always the best. She may be right a lot, even more that the FOX guys but she can also be unfair. I’ve heard her make over the top statements about other people’s motives and intentions based on her views which I thought were just unreasonable.
The FOX format is designed for entertainment and everyone knows that. That bantering is highly entertaining and the guests usually know how to give as well as take. It sells.
Stating that Rachel is not “incapable of mistakes and of being wrong or unfair sometimes” does not invalidate what Rachel has to say, nor does it make her delivery of the facts impotent. You and others, Bob, may not like her interpretation of the data, but then, that would de-rail your modus operandi via nonsensical dissection of the facts through passive aggression, wouldn’t it? I don’t believe that Rachel is unfair; I believe she is just dishing out (but not as rabidly as others) the facts with as much relish as the fundys serve up b******t. In the process, her statements may appear “over the top”, but she is VERY effective. Of course, this may appear “unreasonable” to someone with an agenda of their own, but it works. And it, too, sells. ;)
Stephen, I did not say it did and my statement was not an attack on Rachel as much as my being a skeptical consumer of information. If you are one of those who sees yourself on Rachels “side” then you of course are not going to be objective but rather defensive.
What I said was nothing unusual or overtly political unless everthing is political to you. If you can honestly tell me you always agree with all her positions then I would have to conclude that you are not a very independent thinker. Just by being human she cannot always be right.
We should all have some degree of skepticism.
Wayne, You know that I am an avid supporter of you. If we didn’t have you out there the whole thing would be drowning in “family values”. I know that to keep TWO running, I haven’t donated as much as I wish I could, but that will change. So keep up the good work. You are a role model for me!
By The way, Rachel Maddow is AWESOME. She does some subtle things that convey message and meaning beyond the written text. She is funny, she is timely and she is has a solid media base. I put her right up with Jon Stewart for getting accurate news! So people, quit raggin on my homegirl or none of you are going to Evan’s fake wedding!
I don’t see myself on anyone’s “side”, Bob, neither do I think it necessary for me to choose sides in order to have an opinion: the facts speak for themselves…and even if I was on Rachel’s “side” it does not mean that I am not being objective. It just means that I happen to agree with her.
It would not be possible for me to state that I agree with ALL of Rachel’s positions, since I have only been watching her recently and cannot comment on ALL her positions. I never said that she is “always right”, just that I happen to agree with her outlook on certain/most topics. You may draw any “conclusions” about me that you like…it makes no difference to me. Skepticism, Bob, has its place when considering dubious contributors, of course…but not as a way of life. It is not necessary to approach every topic with skepticism in an effort to discredit or approve. That being said, not every article/interview merits a comment, good or bad. Continue to be skeptical, Bob…..but be open to a person actually being RIGHT once in awhile (btw, do you ever agree with ANYONE about ANYTHING? Just curious).
Stephen, I don’t think we really have an argument here. Yes, I agree with a lot of various people about a lot of things. Sometimes I agree with the facts of an issue but not the tone some people might take with it.
Bob, sorry, but your extremist hard right winger bias is showing — not that there is anything wrong with being that way. But wouldn’t you feel a lot better if you just stuck with the hard right websites. Chances are, from the slant of your commentary, that you are not even gay.
But here you are— impersonating a gay man!
It is not entirely illogical to assume that you have an agenda contrary to the best interests of Gay people everywhere, given this sort of impersonation.
Your mindset is so utterly mainstream hard right; here you are thinking that you are being so fair and balanced about Rachel, excuse me, Doctor Maddow.
Myself, I can smell a right winger extremist from 30 yards. No, Rachel does not make mistakes. Certainly not on the order of the FOX crew of nitwits and mendacious fabricators. If she does, she is very upfront about it. Quite unlike your favorites on FOX. Rachel’s interview with Rand Paul, comes to mind. She allowed him to spew his loathsome purview with out even once shouting, whereas, I might have simply opened fire on the man. FOX, btw, is very far from being an “entertainment”, as there is absolutely nothing about Roger Ailes’ programming which I would term “entertaining”, and everything about it which is politcally treasonous to the spirit of America.
Hang in there, Wayne! Your good work is of inestimable value.
Bull, Please get help soon. As to your comments about my sexuality, frankly, that is none of your business.
“I might have simply opened fire on the man.”
Great interview, you got it all in Wayne. But the real kicker? The hair. Your hair. Best I’ve ever seen it. It was umm, Manufique!
Actually Bob, I think that we all would benefit from knowing your sexuality. Since this is a gay site and you seem to often come from somewhat anti-gay angles it would help to know if you actually are gay like those of us who are honest here.
[...] Watch TWO’s Wayne Besen on The Rachel Maddow Show. Read more [...]
You don’t have to be gay to comment here, guys.
You don’t have to be gay, but if you’re not just say so so we know where you’re coming from.
Daniel, that isn’t fair. If he’s gay, fine, but if he’s not, that doesn’t make him less of an ally.
I’m not gay — I’m asexual. Does that make me suspect, too?
Bob, just read your earlier comment. I don’t believe that I ever stated Maddow doesn’t make mistakes–the difference is, when she does she corrects them, on air. Something they pretty much never do on Fox News. Also, I don’t watch Maddow regularly and while I don’t agree with her all the time her comments are always reasoned.
Makyui–I don’t believe I ever said Bob was suspect. It’s just that he refuses to state if he’s gay or not. And no, you being asexual doesn’t make you suspect. You being defensive and accusatory does.
Also Makyui, your comment about Bob being an ally is questionable. I’m not sure he always is. Sometimes I think he’s just being a troll.
I dated an asexual once. She didn’t bother to tell me until we’d dated for a few weeks. I don’t care if people are asexual but why do they date people who aren’t? (This is really off topic, huh?)
Daniel, I would say I have some confusion and mixed feelings in terms of attractions. I don’t put a hard label on myself.
I am a Christian and come from a conservative outlook but I feel increasingly frustrated by the moralistic and legalistic views of Christians and their injection of moral views into right wing politics.
Christianity should be about following Christ and not about making other people behave like Christians using the law. I think Christ is far less interested in politics and far more interested in people.
Thank you Bob, this helps me asses how I feel about your posts. I came from a conservative background but have become much more liberal over the years as I’ve been exposed to more of real life. It’s easy to maintain a conservative outlook when the only people you know are people who think like you. When I came to terms with being gay and moved away from the enclave I lived in I stopped worrying so much about what other people do. Even if I won’t do certain things myself I don’t judge those who do quite as harshly.
Becky, a friend of mine was engaged to a guy who turned out to be asexual. It lasted for a few years–she was a Christian so they didn’t have premarital sex but once he finally told her she was devastated. I try not to let this affect my feelings toward people who may be asexual–I think as long as they’re honest with people it’s fine.
LOL, defensive and accusatory. I just don’t see what Bob’s sexuality has to do with whether or not he’s trustworthy. If he had said he was straight, what would you have done?
Mayui, I don’t really trust any posters on this site except Wayne and Evan because I don’t know who the rest of you are. If he said he was straight I would judge his postings as that of a straight person–whether you want to admit it or not straight people don’t know as much about gay people as gay people do. Now I know that he’s “questioning” or something similar to that. So, I assume his experience with gay people is more limited than that of gay posters so now I can view his posts from that angle and I won’t view him as harshly. And yes, defensive and accusatory–ROFL.
Well, okay, whatever you say.
[...] us remember the week that was, together: First off, Wayne was on Rachel Maddow last Friday night! It went great. On a smaller scale, I was randomly on David Pakman’s [...]