and gay republicans are just plain weird.

Andy,

You're losing credibility when you call people "shits." Point out their foolishness, their bad ideas, and things they ought to do better, but you don't have to belittle them.

Yeah, I suppose I can rise above them belittling me, my friends, my family, and my community by not belittling them.

Of course, I do see you point too, Kevin :)

I'm glad they are attacking Hatch on this issue. It shows they are beginning to not just write off the gay community. Future steps mean starting to court the gay community - and is done by the Minneapolis Republican City Committee. Carlton Crawford - 5th congressional district chair - has been coming to Pride for years.

Certainly the GOP platform needs revision. I have gotten resolutions passed at Republican caucuses or conventions to: repeal the sodomy law, and oppose the federal and state marriage amendments.

The party belongs to those who show up.

Hey now!! Gay republicans are not that strange. What the party used to stand for and be about used to be something you could be proud of before all the religous zealots took the party over. What you see and hear from the Republicans now days is nothing like what it used to be. Yes I am a Gay republican, however, I have not been able to vote that way in a long long time.

the party belongs to wing-nuts and evanHELLical pseudo-christians

I think it's a stretch to suggest the "Unhatched" comments regarding Hatch's behavior 12 years ago indicate the Minnesota GOP is attacking Hatch for failing to support GLBT people. It seems evident that the intent is to drive a wedge between Hatch and his potential GLBT supporters, perhaps to lead them to support Lourey -- either to inconvenience Hatch, or to give the candidacy to Lourey, a likely less-electable candidate. There is rather a lot of room between the GOP attacking Hatch, and the GOP actually attempting to reach GLBT voters with something remotely desirable to offer them (AS GLBT voters). That said, godspeed to those claiming an interest in taking over and redirecting that party.

Hatch doesn't deserve Gay support. It's a different story when you are talking about looking at candidates based on other issues - which most gays do. Big government supporting gays should vote for Mike Hatch because he's a big government sort of guy. Gays who have the attitude that government should just leave us alone should look at alternatives. I don't see how Hatch is going to be better for gays than Pawlenty. Can someone explain that one to me?

Setting aside for the moment that the Strib just recently reported Pawlenty saying that the era of limited government was over, it is my recollection that Hatch does not support the proposed constitutional amendment, and that Pawlenty has championed it (along with "regretting" his 1993 vote to prohibit sexual orientation discrimination). Unfortunately, the actions of people like Pawlenty, Bachmann, Lindner, and their ilk show that they don't believe that "government should just leave us alone;" they believe government should be used as a tool to marginalize GLBT people. Is the basis of your position that Hatch does not deserve GLBT support based on his actions from twelve years ago? CURRENT actions by Pawlenty et al. that should suggest that he & his deserve our support far, far less.