Charles Drago
As I’ve previously reported, the Gemma campaign has for months been plagued by desperate stunts. But the most troubling pattern that has surfaced is what a former Gemma staffer describes as pervasive homophobia.
Charles Drago has been a key Gemma adviser and vocal surrogate since 2010 and has received $10,500 from the Gemma campaign. Recently, the Gemma campaign rightfully denounced a disgusting tweet by staffer Anthony Sionni.
Later that evening, I posted a couple of homophobic slurs made by Charles Drago directed at David Cicilline in 2009. Below are a couple more slurs made by Drago around the same time. If this kind of bile is coming from one of the campaign’s top advisers, then I can only imagine what kind of conversations are taking place at the water cooler. Kind of makes you cringe.
In the first example, Drago refers to Providence Councilman Terry Hassett as someone who has an “ankle-gripping obseisance” to Cicilline. In the next example, Drago says the term teabagging is in reference to a date between Cicilline and radio host John DePetro. Drago clearly has no shame nor decency.
Will the Gemma campaign denounce these horrible homophobic slurs?
======================================================
I’m not normally one to write on blogs and I’ve made multiple statements about this so I figured why not. Comments simliar to the one made by Anthony Sionni were made by multiple people from the Gemma campaign and they were pervasive in his office as I said. They came from Mr. Drago, Mr. Gemma, Mr. Sionni (on multiple occasions and that wasn’t the first time he made a comment on Twitter making such a comparisson to the Congressman.) These comments are gay-bating and I would never expect this type a behavior from a Democratic congressional campaign. I left because I felt the campaign was moving in the wrong direction both tactfully and morally. There is no room for this type of smear campaign in electoral politics anywhere in this country. This is the type of stuff you would expect from Todd Akin not a Democratic Congressional campaign in one of the bluest districts in the nation. And it’s widely known that I’m not a huge fan of the Congressman. However in the interest in doing what is right and just as I said in the Providence Journal. We need results and while I disagree with how the Congressman handled the City of Providence’s finances, it’s now clear we need to judge him on his job as a Congressman and as a Congressman he has been standing up and fighting for Rhode Island.
Thank you for your comment, Joe.
I’m surprised that more staffers haven’t quit the Gemma campaign at this point.
Took this from Go local Prov.
Voters are now referred to as THUGS! When is this guy going to stop.
Charles Drago
7:11am on Saturday, September 01, 2012
The “cheers” originated from a small group within the “Rhode Island College audience.”
That small group was comprised of thugs carrying out the orders of David Cicilline.
The thugs’ shared missions were to rattle Anthony Gemma and to confuse the viewing public and lame-brained pseudo-journalists.
The thugs failed to accomplish Mission One.
The thugs, based upon the lame-brained reportage above, accomplished Mission Two.
@Joe, you were involved in that campaign, help voters in CD1 make the right choice. Tell everyone about that negative campaign you didn’t want to part of.
“These comments are gay-bating”
Gay-bating(sic)? Do you even know what that means?
“Gay-bating(sic)?” Dude, of all the people on the planet, you, Dog “You’re point is mute” Diesel are the last, the very, very last who should ever–ever!–jump on someone for a spelling error.
I mean: on the planet.
More proof that DD is a troll. This instance of trolling is particularly uncalled for.
There you go again with the troll thing. First you should look up the definition of gay-baiting then look up the definition of troll. Once you’ve educated yourselves, then maybe we can have an adult conversation.
“you should look up the definition of gay-baiting” There is no standard definition of the term, but, when used in a political context, it generally refers to the practice of implying that one’s political opponent is gay.
Here’s a definition from an article on political gay-baiting: ”Generally, gay-baiting is the linguistic practice of publicly insinuating, with little or no evidence, that a rival might be gay, without ever using the word “gay” or homosexual.” ”
www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2010/09/fussy_hysterical_winesipping_pols.html
This is precisely how joelazzerini used the term above.
So what is your problem?
And, again, I’d like to express my glee at the fact that DogDiesel, who has yet to master plurals, contractions, and large swathes of the basic English lexicon, is making an argument about the proper use of slang.
Thank you for making my point turbo. I never expected you to side with me. I’m speechless.
“I’m speechless”–which would give one to think that you’d be making fewer errors of logic, but one would be wrong.
Let’s review:
1) You say that joelazzerini used the term ‘gay-baiting’ incorrectly.
2) I point out that joelazzerini used the term ‘gay-baiting’ correctly.
3) You say, “I never expected you to side with me.”
Are you crazy? Or drunk? I am saying that you are wrong. I am not saying that you are right. The words ‘correct’ and ‘incorrect’ are opposites. I am on the side opposite you, not the same side as you.
Is this more clear?
Sorry turbo but by your own definition, he used the term improperly. Cicilline is openly gay. Where is the “publicly insinuating, with little or no evidence, that a rival might be gay” part of your definition. It’s too bad you fall into the blind support of everything left and blind bashing of an opposing opinion. It’s called the turbo twist. Thanks for the support and educating Smith and Joe. They never would have listened to me.
“Cicilline is openly gay”
You’re saying that gay-baiting is possible only when your opponent’s sexuality is unknown???
That is completely nuts.
“by your own definition”
It’s not my definition, and the definition I offered starts with the word “generally”. ‘Gay-baiting’ is not a word with a hard and fast definition. It does not stretch the term at all to argue that it covers the practice of emphasizing the gay sexual orientation of one’s political opponent to gain the favor of homophobes.
Plus: “In the first example, Drago refers to Providence Councilman Terry Hassett as someone who has an “ankle-gripping obseisance” to Cicilline. In the next example, Drago says the term teabagging is in reference to a date between Cicilline and radio host John DePetro.”
Is Terry Hassett openly gay? Is John DePetro? These comments are gay-baiting by the narrow definition.
So, any way you want to define ‘gay-baiting’, Gemma’s campaign provides an instance of it.
“It’s too bad you fall into the blind support of everything left”
Does it look like I’m supporting Gemma?
“and blind bashing of an opposing opinion”
How is anything I said blind?
“It does not stretch the term at all to argue that it covers the practice of emphasizing the gay sexual orientation of one’s political opponent to gain the favor of homophobes.”
Exactly! That’s what was my point. Thanks for finding the words for me. That’s just what Joe did. Thanks again turbo.
“That’s just what Joe did.”
Yes. Joe used the term properly.
To the specific blast from Sionni, it wasn’t random. The spurious gay-pedophile connection is part of the larger anti-gay corpus that NOM disseminates. Catholics make up a substantial portion of the religious anti-gay movement, and the Catholic Church has (STILL!) an outsized influence on RI politics, including the RI Democratic Party. It’s no coincidence that Senate President Ms. Paiva-Weed – the one-woman roadblock preventing marriage equality from becoming law in RI – is notoriously connected with that institution.
Extreme, anti-gay sentiment still lingers deep within the RI Dems. Like Todd Akin among the national Republicans, Mr. Sionni is no outlier.
Quod Erat Demonstratus.
More here:
mediamatters.org/blog/2012/08/28/exclusive-undercover-at-noms-anti-gay-student-c/189596