Yoho Blames Democrats for Gay Marriage ‘Distraction’

Rep. Ted Yoho, a Republican (of course) from Florida, went on the Family Research Council’s radio show and told host Craig James that the whole gay marriage thing is a distraction ginned up by Democrats to deflect attention away from the country’s larger problems.

“Here we are in the 21st century redefining an institution that has been around for thousands of years,” Yoho said in response to a question from a listener about the impact of a potential Supreme Court decision, “And we’re spending time — and I’m not saying it’s important not to have those discussions —but we’ve got $18.2 trillion [in debt], we’ve got a broken foreign policy, we’ve got immigration that doesn’t work and so we need to start fixing the major things and I think a lot of these smaller things that are important to people they will solve themselves.”

James, apparently forgetting that his boss at the Family Research Council has warned that a ruling in favor of gay marriage will lead to a revolution, called the whole debate on marriage a Democratic-manufactured distraction “away from reality.”

“It’s a distraction of the 10th degree,” Yoho said. “We’re getting this stuff thrown at us and we really need to start focusing on major issues.”

Apparently he forgot that it was the Republicans who turned the issue into a huge political fight on a national level after the Massachusetts courts ordered the legalization of gay marriage in Massachusetts. It was Karl Rove and George W. Bush who, along with conservative interest groups, launched dozens of public referendums in 2004 and 2008 because the public opinion polls showed that it would help them win state elections and the 2004 presidential election as well by pushing the Christian right to go to the polls. They were the ones who turned into a national political battle, but now that public opinion polls have shifted, they want it to go away.

And guess what? It’s going to go away. Once the Supreme Court legalizes it nationwide in June, its use as a political issue will quickly fade.

"I was raised in this holy, mad, darkness, and was frequently baffled, dismayed, and taken ..."

Wiles: Gays Would Rape Angels if ..."
"Trust me...anything Jones would be putting on the table would be FAR too small to ..."

Warning: Alex Jones is Going to ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • John Pieret

    Once the Supreme Court legalizes it nationwide in June, its use as a political issue will quickly fade.

    I’m not so sure of that. The Republicans will have to deal with a large part of its primary voters who are losing their minds over this. If the Republican nominee is forced to pledge opposition to gay marriage and/or to religious right to discrimination laws, that could be hard to run away from in the general election.

  • themadtapper

    And guess what? It’s going to go away. Once the Supreme Court legalizes it nationwide in June, its use as a political issue will quickly fade.

    Its “use” as in “usefulness in general elections” will fade. Its “use” as in “actively used” will not fade at all. In fact, I expect it will see a surge in use, particularly toward primary voters. They’ve convinced a not-insignificant number of primary voters that acceptance of gay marriage represents the imminent collapse of society. You will continue to see fierce battles over gay marriage, particularly in goods/services for the weddings, and you will see them especially at the state level. Popular support for gay marriage will continue to grow, of course, but it will still be a while yet before its political use starts to fade.

  • tbp1

    Wow, talk about projection. Are all Republicans this totally un -self aware?

    I know—or at least suspect—that in the Inner Party it is deliberate policy to use these social issues to distract the proles so they don’t see how they are voting against their own interests, but it seems that a lot of those in the Outer Party really believe it.

  • Alverant

    Gee Yo-yo, who do you think created most of the debt, destroyed our public image to the rest of the world, and made immigration a problem? It was the GOP with their wars of choice and lax business regulations. If you think gay marriage is a small issue, then let it happen and tell your fellow cons to shut up about it.

  • abb3w

    A historical sense of “quickly fade” would easily still allow it to be a factor in the 2016 elections, and probably even the 2018 congressional races; but I’d be very surprised if it still plays in the 2020 elections.

  • Synfandel

    themadtapper wrote:

    They’ve convinced a not-insignificant number of primary voters that acceptance of gay marriage represents the imminent collapse of society.

    Well, they have a point. Just look at the nightmarish post-apocalyptic wasteland that has become of Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, France, The UK, The Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, Spain, Portugal, Slovenia, South Africa, and New Zealand. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

  • whheydt

    Much as I would like to see the issue fade away into the background noise, I really hope it doesn’t “fade away” like Roe v. Wade has.

  • dingojack

    Please someone needs to send this yo-yo to a seedy hotel room, along with a lady of the night and a large bottle of Bacardi [all followed closely by a hidden tabloid ‘news’ crew], if only for the inevitable headline.

    Dingo

  • http://www.thelosersleague.com theschwa

    We need it to fade away so that we can focus on the REAL issues, like Benghazi! and Obama’s Muslimity and Islamic allies, and all of Obama’s socialismic programs. Did I mention BENGHAZI!?? Cuz that is important!

    BENGHAZI!!!111

  • caseloweraz

    “It’s a distraction of the 10th degree,” Yoho said.

    So there are degrees of distraction; it can be measured on some sort* of numerical scale. Well, then, the obvious thing for the GOP to do is mount an 11th-degree distraction.

    * Presumably it’s logarithmic, like the Richter Scale. It ought to have a name. I vote to name it after Pat Robertson.

  • John Pieret

    theschwa:

    How could you forget the vital issue of the fake birth certificate?

  • Chiroptera

    “And we’re spending time — and I’m not saying it’s important not to have those discussions —but we’ve got $18.2 trillion [in debt], we’ve got a broken foreign policy, we’ve got immigration that doesn’t work and so we need to start fixing the major things and I think a lot of these smaller things that are important to people they will solve themselves.”

    You know what’s funny? This is part of the reason why I resent the Right Wing Culture Warriors so much: they are the ones who are wasting our time by putting moronic obstacles in the way of obvious progress so we can’t focus as much on the problems were the solutions aren’t so obvious.

  • scienceavenger

    It’s a good sign that a person is being disingenuous when they fight to the death on a subject they claim isn’t important. If gay marriage isn’t important, then give us our way and move on.

  • amenhotepstein

    YOHO: You Only Hate Once!

  • garnetstar

    How does the court system going about its business on this issue prevent anyone whose job it is from working on the debt or foreign policy or immigration?

    Neither Congress nor the administration has anything to do with what the courts are up to or what they eventually decide. It is not Obama or any Democrats who are “bringing” this up, it’s citizens taking states to court to get their ciivil rights.

    If Republicans want to “work on” any of the above-mentioned issues, why don’t they propose legislation? No one’s stopping them.