Gay Alabama Lawmaker Threatens To Expose Colleagues' Marital Infidelity

[cal04]

Alabama's only openly gay legislator is putting her anti-gay colleagues on notice: If they keep espousing family values rhetoric as a reason to oppose marriage equality, she'll start making their marital infidelities public.

"I will not stand by and allow legislators to talk about 'family values' when they have affairs, and I know of many who are and have," wrote state Rep. Patricia Todd (D) on Facebook over the weekend, as reported by the TimesDaily in Alabama. "I will call our elected officials who want to hide in the closet out."

Todd's post came after a federal judge ruled Friday that Alabama's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. She told The Huffington Post that she decided to issue her threat after reading some of the anti-gay rhetoric coming from certain elected officials in the state.

"If certain people come out and start espousing this rhetoric about family values, then I will say, 'Let's talk about family values, because here's what I heard.' I don't have direct knowledge, because obviously I'm not the other person involved in the affair. But one thing you would never hear about me is that I ever cheated on a partner or had an affair," said Todd.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/26/patricia-todd_n_6549024.html?1422304283

[Lancero]

1. Blackmail pretty much.

While I agree that some people are full of shit, the response to them shouldn't be to become full of shit yourself.

Then again, you don't have direct knowledge - Proof in otherwords - just rumors. So scare tactic perhaps?

Either way, it's a disgrace to see a Democrat resorting to such tactics.

[notadmblnd]

2. Oh stop.

What the disgrace is- is her peers hypocrisy.

[Lancero]

5. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Their actions, if true - Because remember, she admitted that she doesn't actually have proof to her claims - are wrong.

Blackmail is wrong as well.

[jen1980]

10. But two rights are are always right!

[Lancero]

13. So which groups actions do you consider right?

[still_one]

4. They are public officials, and if their positions are family values there

Behavior certainly is free game

[Lancero]

6. I agree that the information should be free game.

But at the same time, blackmail IS a crime.

If she has information about it, why doesn't she reveal it to the public - as she should since they are making family values their public position - instead of trying to blackmail them?

[Bluenorthwest]

11. No, she says if they start in with fakery and bullshit she will call it what it is.

How is that blackmail? She's saying stop the affectation of a holiness that is not your own. I think every hypocrite should be told that. 'If you keep bullshitting, I'll start speaking the truth, so don't bullshit'.

Blackmail : the action, treated as a criminal offense, of demanding money from a person in return for not revealing compromising or injurious information about that person.

Not Blackmail: saying if you trash me for being gay I will shine the spotlight on your truth.


I've been thinking much about this sort of thing of late. Hypocrites should be exposed as such. Instantly.

[Lancero]

14. Differing definitions, but I agree with you on that

They should be exposed instantly - So why is she refusing to reveal her information?

I used blackmail though as a synonym of Extortion. So I admit that I was going off of a broader definition for it.

[LanternWaste]

3. I'd like to see her do this... an obvious and unarguable expose of family-values hypocrites

I'd like to see her do this... an obvious and unarguable expose of family-values hypocrites would certainly allow the public to see, without the ambiguity of the ever-certain rationalization by the hypocrites, if their representatives espouse ideals due to actual conviction, or (and I find this more likely) simple political expediency... something even Joe Beer-Guzzler doesn't enjoy entertaining...

[kelliekat44]

7. Good for her. nt

[Tom Ripley]

8. Good for her

[Bluenorthwest]

9. The reason some straights are so opposed to out LGBT people is that they, the straights are in their

own closets and like it that way. They like the facade of suburban perfection as cover for their own sex lives. If the gays are honest, they might have to be honest too.
So I support what she's doing. Entirely.

[libdem4life]

12. I'd say she is morally within her rights. "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks."

That's an old one...from way back, but still true today.

[KamaAina]

15. More here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026139710

[Donald Ian Rankin]

16. Blackmailing lawmakers, even in a good cause, is very wrong indeed.

To speak up unconditionally and expose their hypocrisy would be fine.

To keep quiet unconditionally and respect their privacy would be fine.

To say "I will expose their affairs if they do not do what I want, but will not do so if they do" is very serious wrongdoing indeed. I don't know if it's technically criminal, or if some equivalent of parliamentary privilege applies, but it's absolutely appalling and should be strongly condemned.

[Bigmack]

17. Blackmail..? I don't think so.

The Marine Corps may not be the best guide to behavior, but they had/have and expression....

"So you wanna play fuck-fuck, eh?... well, let's play fuck-fuck then."

Translated from the grunt: You harm or threaten me, and I'll do the same, only more so.

I think she's entitled to piss in their corn flakes all she wants.

Politics is a full-contact sport.