Shepard Smith is gay.

Musto outs him...

"... As for the folks who think we're doing great in Iraq, is it possible that one--well, at least one--of the right-wing maniacs on the Fox News Channel is 'fairy and unbalanced'? The Washington Blade's KEVIN NAFF just wrote an editorial saying that on a recent visit to a New York gay bar, one of that channel's anchors got a wee bit tipsy and hit on him Lindsay Lohan-style. Naff responded by telling the sauced star that he's not single, and besides he would never date anyone in the closet. (Same here--I won't take anyone out unless he's already out.) Spies tell me the guy in question is the one who said 'blowjob' on the air and was recently linked to NICOLE KIDMAN. How poetic! Maybe gay boîtes should start 'Closeted Only' nights, with half-price poppers bottle service."

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0421/musto.php

JMO

He's obviously a high profile guy on the Conservative Network...FAUX

Ask yourself how many covert gay bashing news stories this asshole has run on his show. Then ask yourself what Shepard Smith's spin on gay marriage was and is.

Not much point in gay rights if they include gay responsibilities like towing a party line, advertising your orientation, etc.

As much as Nader galls me I sometimes wonder why I hate his supporters more than Bush's, and it boils down to me thinking I know their business better than they do. Crummy attitude on my part!

So we oughtn't expect all blacks to vote Democratic or all gays to be out and progressive.

He's a fucking 40 year old grown man. He's too old to be playing in the closet kissy kissy in gay bars and then pretending to everyone that he's not gay, especially since his public persona is Fox News Rock Jawed Straight Tough Guy Anchorman.

Out him, I say.

handle his own life and sex life. Maybe he's entitled to his own idea of his sex life? (I know that in my more ambitious moments I like to think I'm entitled to run my own sex life without Shep Smith's help.)

and I'll tell you this.

My view is that my sexuality is my business. No one else's.

Your sexuality is your business. No one else's.

For the life of me, I do not understand how so many gay folks say, on the one hand, that what they do behind closed dorrs is nobody's business, and then turn around and say "out him".

It's what vindictive people do.

helping to push an extremist agenda on the rest of us and enabling the American Taliban to Constitutionally relegate gay people to third class status. In the past I would have agreed, but I've had enough of the rethug double standard. They are correct, this IS war and THEY started it. Time for the gloves to come off, once we start playing their game better than they do this shit is gonna come to a quick halt.

I understand your frustration and anger, but I'll have no part of it.

I remember a time when we strove to be more enlightened than them.
I believe we can win this "war" and still adhere to principles

This is a privacy issue. Plain and simple. Anything else is just rationalizing.
IMO

What is "Lindsay Lohan-style?"

Very :shrug:

Hope she attacks me with it :evilgrin:

Like that's gonna happen...;(

from Musto's column:

I hear that a recent Saturday Night Live after-bash there was highlighted by the machinations of former host LINDSAY LOHAN, the greedy little vixen who's already had AARON CARTER and chased COLIN FARRELL, and she's only about 40! Lohan was caught squealing, "Where's Jimmy? Where's JIMMY FALLON?" with a sense of determination not seen since the OLSEN TWINS first grabbed for menstrual pads. Observers feel either she's had him or she wanted to have him—and sheesh, haven't we all in our more sensible moments? Alas, Fallon wasn't there, so the big-boobed starlet got to work trying to reach him on his cell phone—again, haven't we all?—and, being both a moral citizen and a college graduate, I don't even want to know what happened next.

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0421/musto.php



Child actress Lindsay Lohan was already an experienced performer when she made her feature debut in the 1998 remake of The Parent Trap. Born in New York City, Lohan began modeling at age three. After appearing in numerous TV commercials, Lohan moved to series TV with a role on the daytime serial Another World from 1996 to 1997. Cast as The Parent Trap's scheming twin sisters after a six month search for just the right girl, Lohan succeeded in filling Hayley Mills' shoes

really that's just disgusting

How about the fact that your post, for some reason, implies that outting a homosexual man against his wishes is alright if he happens to work for Fox News?

The fact you would even condone any kind of outting of homosexuals is repulsive.

He forfeited any such consideration when he joined the pack baying after President Clinton....

People are entitled to privacy. To say otherwise is dangerous. Nobody forfeits their privacy. As to what he said about Clinton, "If Bill doesn't feel the need to out him, you shoudn't either." (Let's be honest -- if he is homosexual, Bill's people would have let that slip a long time ago.)

..."slide" in terms of whatever they were hiding in their "closet". Larry Flynt had the goods on quite a few people and was asked to back off after some of the leaders of the NeoCon pack had been exposed as major hypocrites.

At least if "Bill's people" ever let something "slip", you could count on that "something" being true and well-researched, unlike the crap spread around by the Arkansas Project which includes the stories created by Jennifer Flowers and Paula Jones (read "The Hunting of the President" by Conason and Lyons...a real eye-opener).

As far as your comment that "nobody forfeits their privacy", I'm of the opinion that nobody forfeits their privacy as long as they're not actively seeking to ruin someone else. What goes around, comes around.

I mean, that's really what we're talking about here.

Sure the man has the right to be privately gay. If he's a Lying Piece of Human Garbage baying for the hides of Homosexuals, then HELL YES he should be outed.

Just because THIS round of Nazis hasn't gotten violent YET doesn't mean we should forget what they are and who's progagnda strategy of demonization and dehumanization they are.

This is as big a news about a Party Official (and that's what Mr. Smith IS) that has come out since Ernst Roehm being "outed".

I agree with the Magistrate. A man who makes his living by Gay Bashing should DEFINITELY be outed.

Definitely.

If Shep is gay, what he is doing is LEGAL!!!!!!! Child Molestors are CRIMINALS. You seem to be equating homosexuality with Child Molestation.

i hope you don't because what you are saying is that being gay means you have to give up your freedom of speech or your right to privacy.

you are saying that gay people are not entitled to both.

or else, and this is even worse in my opinion, you are saying that a gay person can only have a right to privacy and freedom of speech if they agree with you.

We ALL have the right to privacy,wretches or not.

But certain things bring out my ruthless streak, and participation in the '98 Coup is one of them. Those who did, in any capacity, are on "a little list of those who'd not be missed," and whatever compasses their downfall, or causes them distress, will meet no protest from me, but rather the opposite: traffic accident, lightening strike, exposure of private secrets, it makes no mind in my eye.

I understand the feeling,that's for sure.

This reminds me of the Bush daughters. The family can say "please respect their right to privacy", but when they go to public places and engage in conspicuous behavior, you have to assume they don't want their actions to remain private. If a celebrity goes to a gay bar and hits on strangers, you have to assume he's not really in the closet about anything.

The reason this story is of interest is (1) because people are just generally interested in anything having to do with well-known people, and (2) because it helps show that anyone can be gay, and it's not really a choice. Cheney's daughter is not at all in the closet, but it's still of interest that she is gay because it helps dispel some myths, and it may help humanize gays in the minds of those who feel gay people have nothing to do with them. It's harder to be anti-gay when you realize that one of your children could grow up to be gay or that one of your friends or co-workers could be gay.

Why do you assume this is being done just to "punish" Smith? It seems to me that everyone (including Naff) is just assuming that Smith is in the closet. Has he ever claimed to be straight? No one has provided any evidence that he has.

Why should he be punished for the sins of his idiot co-workers?

it's a blessing.

Out 'em all.

why should he be forced to

I'm sick of closeted gays in positions of power. If every gay person came out tomorrow, the world would be an infinitely better place for gays and lesbians.

He chose to whore himself for a right-wing pimp. Out him.

If all the closeted gays would stop pretending they're straight, how many teen suicides might be prevented? How many mothers and daughters and sisters and brothers would have to wake up to the fact that yes, gay people are just PEOPLE and deserve to be loved for who they ARE not who they PRETEND to be.

If ol' Shep wants to whore himself out to a bunch like Fox News then he's no better than homophobic scum his network supports.

Out the bastard.

House and Senate repugs too. Out 'em all.

how would you like it if i decided what was a blessing or a curse in your life?

lent his name to it by being there? He works for a network that actively opposes gays and supports an anti-gay president, and party. His work helps put and keep that ideology in power. If he is gay, and he's part of an organization like FOX, he's a hypocrite, whether he dishes or not.

But it might be compared to a William Bennett, our oft-proclaimed "National Scold" and Official Holier-than-Thou Arbiter of Morality who's got a rip-roarin' gambling problem. Or Jimmy Swaggart or Jim Bakker or any of those "sacred cows" who turn out to be cow turds.

For what it's worth - my husband wasn't sure what the passage at the top of the thread inferred - until he googled "Fox" and "blowjob." Try it.

that doesn't "think" like you do deserves to be outed if they are gay.

what a stupid position.

What I said was that a gay man who works for and supports an organization that persecutes gays and lesbians is hurting others who are gay and lesbian without having to live the consequences of his actions. Outing him makes him live with those consequences.

I don't eat meat, so I don't agree with or think like McDonald's but I'm not advocating that everyone who works at McDonald's be outed. See the difference?

He has no problem sleeping, with or without a man, with the money he makes enabling a hate network like Fox. He does have a pair of brass ones though if he thinks hitting on a guy in a New York bar would not get him noticed. If he tried to pick up that guy, he is damn stupid if he thought he would get a hit and not sooner or later get bagged by someone calling him on it.

He works at Fox. Nuff said.

mike jarett who hosts on weekends morning fox and friends is openly gay. this could have been him. but mike jarett doesn't really come across as right wing and disgusting as others so i would not judge him based on hannity, shep, o'reilly etc.

Did Roger take the week off when he was hired?

and he seems to be moderate to liberal leaning also. that's the only time i can actually watch the show without pressing mute. of course they have at least 1 right winger up there with them also, but it's not as bad as during weekdays when they are all right wingers and spew bush worshipping crap.

than the weekday crew. Admittedly, Juliette seems to shift gears depending on whether she's on weekdays or weekends but Mike and Julian (black host) tend to maintain a neutral/both sides stance in the discussions for the most part.

His bio:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,64563,00.html

wasn't sure what his last name exactly was.

going down as low as FreeRebublic.

So stop gay-bashing immediately.

It doesn't matter at all, Repub. or Dem or whatever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


:grr:

:nuke:

you will find enough.

BTW 70 posts in just 2 days tells a lot.

Just a thought...............

but anyway :hi:

Most of the 70 (now over 80) posts are about the general issue of "outing." And I really don't see all this gay bashing you're talking about.

Looks like his days are numbered at the Fox Network.

:eyes:

But I gather he must be a hypocrite of some stripe...
argh

Not that there's anything wrong with that!!

Who cares if he is gay?

with a lot of other things, but not with the way he choose to live!

BTW who said it's him? I don't belief it, it would be too risky to be on that network in this position and hiding his lifestyle!!

of Musto.

as it should be. If Shep is a conservative, so what, fight him on these terms, politically, do not give the wackos ammunition

So when Rodger has his big meetings and talks about spinning the "gay" stuff, I am sure Shep gives the eloquent speech on respect.

publishes a bestseller called "The Book of Not Being Gay" then there might be some equivalence.

Being a friggin' HUMAN BEING is what exempts him. Rights--like rights to sexual privacy--are for everyone, not just people you like.

You're confusing the two. If someone is hanging out in gay bars, which are most assuredly public places, getting ripped to the tits, and hitting on every man who comes within ten feet, then he has already given up any reasonable expectation of privacy.

What is involved in a case like that is secrecy, namely the desire of this person that other people keep his secret for him. Is there such a thing as a right to secrecy?

As I said in a post below, I don't care much about Smith--he's obnoxious but not a real threat to anyone. But the difference between privacy and secrecy is an important one that always gets lost in these discussions of outing.

Nobody has the right to out a gay man, regardless of how hypocritical he may seem. (it's complicated) It's his right, and I don't condone the work he does and it must affect him far more than we can imagine. I don't think he can be all that excited about making fun of gays in front of so many Faux viewers.

If he is hanging out in public gay bars, it makes me think he wants to be open - it could even be a first step. It has to be difficult to work in such a hostile environment. A homophobic network who treats the like with such shame and hate. I would hope at some point, his conscious will lead him to a better work environment that he can feel proud being who he is. It is his choice, not anybody elses.

My son waited until he felt safe and comfortable, I am so proud of him in every respect.

If it wasn't an invasion of privacy then it wouldn't be a gossip item, would it? Isn't that the whole point of gossip?

You're talking about legalities, like pawing through people's trash or where photos can be taken.

I'm talking about decency, which is purely optional. (And lot of folks haven't opted for it.)

Elected officials are a different matter because they have offered their orientation as a job qualification--that sucks, but it's the case. Most voters feel entitled to know the orientation of candidates, and democratic elections are self-defining hiring processes. But few people think they have that kind of 'informed buyer' right to know everything about news readers.

as I said in a post below. But let's assume that, say, Orrin Hatch is running around gay bars getting pickled and hitting on other men. Some here have said that even such a case as that does not warrant outing. Bullshit. Hatch's right to secrecy does not outrank the basic civil rights of millions of Americans that Hatch is working day and night to deny.

So I'm glad we agree that anti-gay politicians are fair game.

But I still think that you are missing the point about privacy vs. secrecy. They're two very different things. By going into a gay bar, which is a public place, and trying to make a pickup, one pretty much outs oneself.

First, I don't see any gay bashing going on here on this. I do see comments like this though as strange...

.."pressed into association with his natural progressive brethren who, apparently, are a gaggle of two-bit despot wannabees who are as thrilled at the idea of hurting people through disclosures about their sex lives as the lowest right televangelist."

Nice.

Anyhoo, any closeted guy that is in a public position, politician, or news head, that is in the closet and enables the Right's agenda is outable. There is no sliding scale for politicians and another for "Joe" the newsguy. By the way, I bet the words, "and he was not whistling showtunes", would not even cause him to bat an eye.

I have to get back to my little throne, you know, despot me.

use the fact hypothetical fact that Orrin Hatch is running around gay bars as a means of influencing his voting on issues you consider important.

There's a word for that.

It's not a very pretty word, either.

There's an ugly word for that, too.

what ugly word do you mean?

Do you mean to be "discrete"?

Do you mean to respect the decisions of others regarding where and when they choose to reveal to their families their own sexual orientation?

What word are you referring to?

Gay people helping professional homophobes maintain the credibility that enables them to pursue their agendas.

Again, we're not talking about outing schoolteachers here.

And I'm curious as to how you felt about, say, Henry Hyde being outed as an adulterer, or Strom Thurmond as a secret miscegenator. Were those outings also inappropriate, or is there some special shame attached to being gay that applies here?

being "outed" as an adulterer are much like my views on Bill Clinton being "outed" as an adulterer.

Both actions, to the extent that they were done in an effort to get either of those men to change their positions on political issues, were little more than political blackmail. And the people who outed those two men were, in my own view, self-righteous folks who would stop at nothing -- even blackmail --- to get what they wanted. I want nothing to do with people such as that.

My view of Strom Thurmonad as a secret miscengenator is a bit more nu anced. First, it was only revealed after he died. It was not used as an effort to get him to change his policy positions on anything, as far as I know. Second, it was revealed by his own daughter as a way of affirming who she is. I seldom have any problem with a life-affirming action.

But I do with blackmail.

And regarding "collaboration" -- I find it a much better thing to try to convince a person with who I disagree by using reason and logic rather than blackmail.

There are just some things people do not do to other people. Blackmail is one of them.

HELLO.....SINCE WHEN DOES SOMEONE NEED AN EXEMPTION TO KEEP IDIOTS FROM PRYING INTO THEIR SEX LIFE?

legislation, you better believe its relevant.

I'm curious, for instance, to see how Senator Lindsey Graham R-SC, will vote for the Federal Marriage Amendment.

You don't live in South Carolina. Sen. Graham does not represent you. You live in Illinois.

Even if Sen. Graham were gay, are you saying that he must vote the way you think he ought to on every issue that you happen to think is "pro-gay"?

Sen. Graham's primary constituents live in South Carolina. Even if every single person in South Carolina were gay, I'd bet that you would not get unanimity on how a Senator should vote on the Federal Marraige Amendment.

Here's an example of good dope on Shep Smith:

Shep Smith was arrested during the FL recount for intentionally driving into a woman who was standing holding a parking space he wanted.

It's bad to drive into people so it's noteworthy. I don't care if he's gay. This whole thread is predicated on some idea that it matters or is what Marge Simpson calls "some of our business." The operative idea is that being gay is shameful. Otherwise there wouldn't be this kind of excitement here.

What if someone printed a rumor that a certain Fox personality was overheard telling a friend he had voted for Gore. Would that be as thrilling? If not, why not?

Sheppard Smith is being outed as a gay man that prostitutes himself for Fox, a notorious network that is GOP TV.

Think about it. Why is it that republicans are outed so spectacularly? Why are they so scared of it? Because they live one way, and tell others to do the opposite.

be pressed into association with his natural progressive brethren who, apparently, are a gaggle of two-bit despot wannabees who are as thrilled at the idea of hurting people through disclosures about their sex lives as the lowest right televangelist.

some times the definition of progressive, displayed by some on this board, leaves me dumstruck.

When you work to actively hurt gay people, you deserve no quarter.

This piece of scum is the lowest form of life - he is a NAZI enabler and sympathizer who does harm to gay people every moment he supports the repukes' agenda.

Apologists are the worst scum.

That's a pretty serious charge there.

Someone actively trying to hurt those of us who are gay deserves no quarter.

But someone actively trying to hurt someone who wishes to keep his or her sexuality private deserves our sympathy and support?

You may think that apologists are the worst scum.

I happen to think that people who intentionally try to hurt people are right down there, too.

The notion that "progressives" would consider blackmail as an acceptable form of changing a person's position on political issues (or that they would attempt to smear someone with a scurrilous charge) is just what Joe McCarthy did. He was no progressive.

in business, there's no such thing as "bad publicity"

see, we're discussing faux... and how many will tune in to shep tomorrow just to check him out -- remember, these are cunning mutherfuckers.. i don't trust anything coming from the right...

if i were the guy from village voice, i would have taken him upstairs & banged the shit out of him just to comfirm the legitimacy of the story... part of journalistic integrity... right?

:shrug:

Should the gay community be expected to protect its enemies?

I have my doubts as to whether Shepard Smith rises to the level of outing, but let's consider a different case, that of Pete Williams, who was Dick Cheney's media mouthpiece when he was Secy. of Defense.

Williams made little secret of being gay. He hung out in D.C. gay bars, vacationed with his lover and Andrew Sullivan and Sullivan's lover at Fire Island, etc. But every day Williams was all over TV defending the Pentagon's policy of firing all gay troops.

Did Williams deserve the protection of the very community that he was being paid to attack? I don't think so. And the lives ruined by the policy Williams was making big bucks to defend were worth a lot more than Williams's expectation that everyone keep his little secret. (And there's a big difference between secrecy and privacy, one that always gets lost in these "Outing is so awful!" discussions.)

History affords some other examples, worse ones than Williams. Was the gay community obligated to protect J. Edgar Hoover and Roy Cohn, two self-loathing homosexuals who made careers of persecuting their own people? I don't think so, and I couldn't care less about the "right to privacy" of someone who opposes my very right to exist.

Is Smith in the same league as Hoover or Cohn or even Williams. I don't think so. But it is pure foolishness to argue that outing is never, ever justified under any circumstances.

Simple as that. No one dragged *ahem* him to the gay bar and no one forced him to hit on a guy he didn't know. I know of no law or even social etiquette that says you shouldn't tell anyone else if someone hits on you in a gay bar.

Shepard wants to come out. It's as simple as that. He made his choice, and I think it's about time he did.

Click here for stunning, insulting, shocking, funny buttons, magnets and stickers

This is like the beating your wife comments. You can't defend yourself and, frankly, it's nobody's business who you have sex with, what gender they are and what sexuality you claim.

:boring:

Anyone know?

Click here for stunning, insulting, shocking, funny buttons, magnets and stickers

..."he wasn't singing show tunes."

LOL!

. . . that Musto guy's column is just the kind of celebrity-sniffing crap that's turning our collective culture into a landfill. Whether anything he says is true or not . . . who cares . . . god help us for even reading it.

And none of ours...Its the same when we get upset when the reppubbies and drudge go snooping in Clintons sex life..Or anyone else for that matter...I know, I know, that if he was a lib or dem the rightys would be parading this fact everywhere..I take pride that WE are not them..Hes not breaking any laws and its his personal and private business witch sex he is attracted to.
With thats said I cant stand Smith and I think hes nothing but a Bush and Fox news flunkie getting his talking points from the RNC. Id rather attack the things hes said and not the man..Thats what THEY do..

I couldn`t care less whether their newsreaders are gay, straight or somewhere in between. That`s their business, not mine.

What I do care about is that I don`t waste any of my time watching their channel. I`d rather watch paint dry.

It's his own business.

The whole concept of outing assumes that being gay is such a deep dark secret that naturally no one would want it revealed - unless they've made a big public announcement, in which case you can assume that it's no longer a secret. Maybe Smith was never in the closet to begin with. Smith's being in the closet was Naff's assumption, but Naff doesn't say that Smith himself claimed to be in the closet. Maybe Naff's assumption was incorrect, based only on Smith's place of employment. I've never "outed" myself as a heterosexual, but that doesn't mean I'm trying to keep it a secret. If someone asked me if I was straight, I wouldn't deny it. Perhaps Smith is in the same position. QC and Cronus are correct that Smith "outed" himself -- if he was ever "in" to begin with -- by hitting on strangers in a public gay bar.

when you are married, it is public record who your spouse is!!!! All the married gays are "outed".

If outing gays hurts people then we NEED discrimination statutes protecting gays... People of color and women can't hide themselves and neither should gays.

If Smith is hurt by the knowledge that he is gay, then maybe things oughta change! Maybe there should be on-the-job protections and anti-hate crime legislation and gay civil unions/marriage.

Why not just post your text here instead of cluttering the board with another thread? Sorry, but that's a pet peeve of mine. Unless a post is far off-topic, I think it should be kept within the thread that inspired it.

but did you raise this point with the author of this thread (this is at least the fifth thread on him)

...But I've been away from DU for a while. Incidentally, I barely knew who Shepard Smith was before now. Still, a duplicate thread caused by carelessness is bad, but deliberately starting a new thread is worse, IMO. It's like saying your post is too important to be lost in a bunch of other posts. The only time I feel you should start a new thread is when the topic is so far off that it would change the focus of the original thread.

posts then those of us who don't like homophobic threads should get to post one.

I don't know why people get so hung up on post counts. Just because a thread has a lot of posts doesn't mean everyone who posted agrees with the original post. I don't even think it's a good indication of what topics matter most to DUers. Sometimes I read threads that are IMO very important, but I don't post because I have nothing to add. I posted to this thread because I think an important point was being missed and I wanted to make it - namely that no one has shown any evidence that Smith was "in the closet" to begin with, so why is this even considered to be "outing"? I actually have very little interest in Smith or in his orientation, I just thought it was an important point that no one else was making.

and I know that it is all but impossible to follow long threads like this with dial up. Unless you know a post is going to be really good or you wish to read it for some other reason, a dail up user is very likely to simply ignore posts after a certain number.

is this a surprise to people?

...especially when the person being outed is openly supporting a homophobic agenda (of course the sad thing is it will make NO difference whatsoever to those who believe in that agenda that one of its proponents is actually gay).

But that should ONLY be when the person has openly endorsed homophobia (working for Fox could be interpreted as a de facto endorsement of the entire right-wing agenda, including gay scapegoating), but also only on the condition that the evidence of the person's homosexuality is highly convincing.

One comment by one guy in one gossip column is NOT convincing in the least, so I think Shep's sex life should be left alone, and people should just focus on his general obnoxiousness. (There's the parking incident, and the fact that he's also part black, but seems to want to hide that too)

CNN's Anderson Cooper is apparently semi-out, and his network also shills a lot for the GOP...

That evil man deserved FAR worse than being outed.

...he's going on the air and promoting an anti-gay agenda?

I watch all the cable news channels, and yes, FOX is very right wing in that spectrum.

However, I don't think Mr. Smith has been spouting anti-gay remarks. He may work for those who are homophobic, but I doubt he says anything on-air...

After all, he licks Bush's ass every day on TV.

Click here for stunning, insulting, shocking, funny buttons, magnets and stickers