Well, but except it could be argued that the sentence is incorrect. The fellow in question didn't say being called gay was revolting; he said he found the tactics, i.e. spreading (possibly false) rumors revolting. It is a fine point, I agree, but going from someone saying 'I find these tactics revolting" to "I find being called gay revolting' makes me twitch.

MKK

The only rumors about him are that he's gay. The only tactics is that an alt-weekly publshed an article pointing that out. So, that's the revolting tactics - calling a spade a spade.

He's been outed before, so it isn't as if this is even new information. IN addition, he's quite out in D.C. - he goes out publically with his boyfriend and goes to gay bars with his also gay chief of staff. All of thse things are fodder for your typical Lloyd Grove column - if there wasn't such a double standard on these issues.

If people want to argue that it's no one's business who a politician is sleeping with - man, woman, or dog - well, okay, go ahead - but I rarely see that standard enforced anywhere in the media.

Atrios: Ah, I didn't know those things about him. And yes I would prefer that we leave alone who people sleep with. Except for me, you can tell me of course. But as you say...

MKK