Pre-Disclaimer Disclaimer: NO, there is NOT any implication in this post that "Gay = bad." It's about the despicable-ness of Matt PUDGE's wingnutism and hypocrisy.
Further Disclaimer: "PUDGE" does NOT refer to weight. It is a made-up word sort of reminiscent of "PUTZ." I mean, how do you slur somebody with a name like "DRUDGE"?!1 "Sludge" would be too obvious and not that different from his actual surname.
**********QUOTE********
http://www.nypost.com/seven/04062009/gossip/cindy/nasty_madoff_name_a_burden_for_ruthie_163101.htm?page=0POLITICAL pros say: Rudy, who's been very quiet lately, will make the run for governor. But whether the presidential campaign dampened him or he's reading polls, who knows? What they say they know is, he'll do all the paperwork, make all the moves, gather all the groups, get all the p.r., make all the statements, fund raise, file, flap around -- but . . . won't . . . run. They say he needs to create buzz around himself. To help himself in person, in general and in business in particular. They say.
http://gawker.com/5200009/drudge-i-do-not-love-sex-with-menThe Gays
Drudge: 'I Do Not Love Sex With Men'
By Ryan Tate
.... Witness his email interview with Chris Rovzar of New York, who elicited (GASP!) a reaction from the tight-lipped protoblogger to an item in Out that said the Drudge Report proprietor "happens to love Chaka Khan, The Young and the Restless, and sex with men" but is homophobic and anti-abortion-rights. Drudge:
“False. False. False. I do not love sex with men. My site is not anti-gay. I present both sides of the anti-choice-life issue... I liked Chaka in the eighties, and have not watched Young and the Restless in twenty years! But I do watch Judge Judy!”
The bit about not loving gay sex is a red herring: Drudge has never been said to particularly relish his homosexuality or embrace it; in fact his gay romantic/sexual side has been described (when alleged) as conflicted and awkward.
David Brock, the former right-wing writer, wrote in his memoir Blinded by the Right about a "scary" date in which Drudge, after bringing Brock flowers and navigating the Santa Monica gay strip "like a pro," stepped on a competing suitor's foot "really hard" (in Drudge's purported words) in a nightclub to scare him away from Brock. He also reproduced an overly blunt email in which Drudge wrote, "Laura (Ingraham) spreading stuff about you and me being fuck buddies. I should be so lucky."
Alec Baldwin stated that Drudge made an advance on him in an ABC Studios hallway that had "kind of a creepy quality to it." ....
********(link to Alec BALDWIN's quote: )
http://www.advocate.com/print_article_ektid52506.aspAlec Baldwin On Men, Love, & His Bible-Thumping Brother
Brandon Voss gets the goods from Baldwin on the men he's loved, advances from Matt Drudge and his brother's attacks on gay marriage.
By Brandon Voss
....
So you weren’t tempted by conservative blogger Matt Drudge’s alleged sexual advance in an ABC Studios hallway? No, because there was a kind of creepy quality to it. Has he come out?
I don’t think so. How did you react when he threatened legal action after you shared the anecdote on Howard Stern’s radio show in 2002? I just remember thinking, Why is he so uptight about being gay? Who’s worried about that anymore? And I wasn’t calling him gay. I just said he hit on me, which I found unusual. Because he's somebody who could vilify me politically, but he sure didn’t seem like he wanted to vilify me when we were in the hallway. And maybe he’s not gay. Maybe he just had some sort of moment there in the hallway.
********UNQUOTE********
THE PROBLEM WITH A DISCLAIMER is its coming off as defensive, especially when it's preemptive. Trouble is, it's damned if do/don't: NOT including it first results in the predictable problems.
DISCLAIMER re: linking to the NY Post (for to head-off highly predictable, OT/hijacking posts):: Yes, it is a RAG. Yes, it is owned by NewsCorp/Faux's MURDOCH. No, he doesn't Dictaphone content to his gossip columnists. No, "gossip" does NOT equate to "UNtruth" (OR with "triviality" for that matter). These old time gossipers are more journalistically reliable than Tweety and such ilk. Frequently, political tidbits are here first, later to show up in more "respectable" venues. Keep friends close, enemies closer. Cherrypicking intel results in self-fulfilling FALSENESS. I got hooked on these gossipers when they were on the E!1 network and, when they were cancelled, tracked them down and they happened to be at the RAG (NY Post). ALL I read at the RAG are the gossip and the horoscope. On Edit: If this disclaimer is NOT ENOUGH, if you don't like this o.p., PLEASE just click OUT without leaving your any-further-adoo(doo)!1