Interim Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro’s had this to say:
“… If I were — and please don’t clap your hands and I am going to say this with all of my heart — if I were gay I’d take ownership of it with pride and shout it to the four winds and I would have no problem loving whomever I had to love with my heart. Because the worst homophobe is one who is gay and discriminates against his own. It’s similar to a foreman in a slave-owner’s farm. A black traitor who whips an African man’s back. That’s the worst homophobe: He who denies his identity and discriminates against his equals. …”
This assessment sounds about right to me.
h/t Blabbeando
Maduro is saying this because he has been gay-baiting his chief opponent for the presidency, who has called him on his homophobia. This is just another way of underlining the accusation that his opponent is gay. You seem to have fallen for his homophobia.
Wow!!!!!!!!!!
Well done, Jay, for pointing that out. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/03/disgusting-chavez-protege-maduro-opens-campaign-by-calling-opponent-capriles-a-homosexual/
Thanks for pointing this out Jay. I wasn’t fooled by it. But, I am on vacation and as a result did not read the fine print as closely as I normally would have. I appreciate you bringing this to our attention.
Given that, then for me the question is what evidence does he have that his opponent is gay?
How were you not fooled by it? You quoted a known homophobe and then claim the reason you did so was because you were on vacation and didn’t read the fine print? Take ownership of your posts.
Thank you all for bringing this up — although I must say that the statement itself is a very strong statement indeed – and if true – in itself is supportive enough, it’s the surrounding baggage that is unacceptable.
Of course the speech quoted is more complex than either this post or the Gateway Pundit article made it. In it the Interim President said quite directly that he was not homophobic and that when same sex persons got rights in Venzuela (which they did under Chavez in the Constitution) it was the opposition that tried to block them (which is factually true and easily checked). He went on to say that if he were a gay man — and quote above — all of which is very true.
http://www.havanatimes.org/?p=89531
Taken in context it seems like he is actually condemning the man, not as a gay man, but as a homophobic gay man – one who attacks his own. It is true that there is no homophobe as bad as a closeted gay man, and I am left wondering if we are seeing his speech in this discussion through a very “American” lens, perhaps?
Kind thoughts.
Reyn
Thanks for that context Reyn.