Wasn't he just saying that calling him a liberal is an offense? I guess we'll just have to settle with calling him a fucking moron.

There, that's better.

The last sentence of this post is pure gold. And slightly arousing.

I'm copying pasting from a workaround that I found:
-----------------------

Better yet CHEAT MANHUNT. Don't pay for pics. There's a free workaround:

HOW TO VIEW FULL-SIZE PHOTOS FOR FREE:

- Use Firefox
- In a profile, right click and select Copy Image Location
- In a new tab, paste the image location URL - it looks like this:

http://www.manhunt.net/showpic.php?showuid=123456&i=1&type=t_

That "t_" on the end means "thumbnail". Remove it:

http://www.manhunt.net/showpic.php?showuid=103582&i=1&type=

...and the resulting URL will be the FULL SIZE version.

Remember, DON'T GIVE MONEY TO MANHUNT! Use this trick instead. Happy Hunting, and don't forget to vote!

POSTED BY: TURINGCUB | AUG 13, 2008 10:55:28 PM

NOTE: last link above totally NSFW

also, I'm pro-monogamy and don't use the site, full disclosure

McCain's so desperate for funding that I wouldn't be surprised if he sunk even lower for gay cash... like say, on his knees.

If McCain just limited himself to contributions from closeted gays in the Administration, he'd be able to claim they're all "straight GOP members" and the press would believe him, even though they know it's not true.

But I guess they're too busy looting the US Treasury before America kicks them out ...

So we now live in a world where people lose their job because of their political affiliation... And we celebrate it!

Nice.

Tell me again how this is a good thing?

Seemed like a bad idea when the DOJ was purging people with "the wrong politics"...

uh, dumbfuck, it's one of the fuckin' OWNERS of the company who's stepped down as Chairman; he still OWNS part of the company.

He's entitled to have his political viewpoint. I am also entitled to not use his product if I don't agree with that viewpoint and find it harmful to the common good.

Wait a minute #7, so you're comparing the head of a corporation (who's undermining the very customers who pay his salary) to a government position that's presumed to be unbiased and without political affiliation...?

You're an idiot.

i'm sure how i feel about punishing someone for their political beliefs -- especially if he really believes there are other more important issues and that obama won't help the gay marriage cause.

but there are other people who work at that site who are also being punished by this "boycott". that, and it ends up looking like the conservatives burning dixie chick albums.

The site gets money from non-GOP subscribers. If that's the only income the chairman gets, that means some non-GOP money is going to pay for McCain's campaign, and it's their right to unsubscribe and it's the site's founder's right to get rid of someone if he thinks that someone is losing him money. Makes sense to me. These aren't lawyers, these are people selling sex. I don't think "morals" have much to do with their decisions on business matters.

Not shedding tears for Crutchley at all, but it seems, *based on the letter excerpt Dominic quoted* that the impetus to asking Crutchley to step down was because OMG HE WAS CALLED A REPUBLICAN IN HATE MAIL AND THAT'S OFFENSIVE. Crutchley should have been aware of the consequences of his actions. Maybe he was and he doesn't give a fuck. But he *was* asked to step down because of partisan issues in the Board, something Crutchley was entitled to have. But, yeah, more lols than tears here.

I personally prefer Dudesnude.com. It's free free FREE!

@13:

And www.bigmucle.com and www.bigmusclebears.com. Also free and hot.

I love that Dudes Nude lets you search by how much is shown in the profile photos. No headless cock shots for me--I need to see a goddamned face.

So doesn't it go against the grain of promoting diversity and then chastise a homosexual for his political dispositions?

I wish I had a manhunt account so I could angrily unsubscribe :(

@15 - No, multiple reasons. I have many family, friends, and coworkers who are moderate or republican. Most of us aren't saying nobody can be a Republican, or have right wing viewpoint. This issue is we don’t want to financially support them (through Manhunt) when he gives some of those profits to McCain.

Also, he didn't just say he was an issues voter who picked McCain through careful consideration, but said "Don't call me a liberal, that's an insult" Implying disdain for the very people that make up the majority of his business. Why should I give money to someone who views me as a liberal with disgust. If it weren't for liberals, and the gay civil rights movement, his company could never exist because being gay would be illegal.

Never implied anyone should not carefully choose who the spend their money with. Just that it was fucked that he was asked to "step down" because of his political beliefs.

And

Considering we have Bill Clinton to thank for DOMA and DADT, and that EVIL conservative Supreme Court to thank for repealing the Anti-sodomy laws... I'm not going to become a Democrat based on their "position" on gay rights (which seems to me to be talk quietly in private and actually do nothing or worse. After you get your own big gay wad of course...).

And lets not forget that in an interview with the Chicago Daily Tribune, BHO said, "I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman." Soooo... Tell me again how that's dramatically different from McCain's position?

let me help you understand that...

"I do believe that ... marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman." -Barack Obama

That's why I only visit www.chubspot.com and www.chubarama.net.

YGBKM @ 18:
He was asked to step down because his choices got in the way of the business making money. This happens all the time. If you're running a business that primarily makes its money off of men fucking each other, it would make sense not to do anything to jeopardize that relationship with your clientele, especially if you're the chairman.

Also, as a history lesson, DADT happened in 1993, a decade and a half ago, and while disappointing was still seen as an improvement. DOMA, which was signed into law in 1996, 12 years ago, and was viewed at the time as a way to throw up a barrier to an actual marriage amendment. I've also noticed that the republicans in charge did absolutely nothing to improve or rescind either of these two laws in the years they were in charge.

So maybe the individuals themselves may not be pro or anti a specific cause (Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader, is anti-abortion for example) but the Democratic organization as a whole is definitely very much pro-gay rights as a matter of course. This is not true on the Republican side. Hell, another "Massachusetts Republican" invoked a century old anti-miscegeneration law to keep homos from out of state from getting married.

Also, do you really think that the Supreme Court would actually repeal the sodomy laws if John McCain was appointing justices? One of the pro votes in Lawrence has already retired and has been replaced with a staunch theological conservative. The days of independent Sandra Day O'Connor justices is long since past.

13, 14, and 19:

www.bearporn.com is where its at! Its mostly free too! ;)

@20

I'm just saying that if your going to go Democrat (or Republican) on a single issue, your probably a fool anyway, but at least choose one they are likely to actually do something about.

We've had Democrats in control of the House and the Senate for a while now, and I'm not seeing much progress on gay rights from those sectors...

Where are they on even taking the very small step of expanding the existing Hate Crimes legislation to include sexual orientation? When are Pelosi and Reid going to put their awesome power behind even that modest step?

@22 - By "awhile now," you mean less than two years without a veto proof majority in the Senate and President who only got chummy with his veto pen as soon as those Democrats took control? Not much power there, except to keep the President from being able to accomplish the legislative excesses that he did the prior six years.

So that brings us to your answer, which is that they'd have a fighting chance to do these things if Barack Obama was in the White House. John McCain isn't going to give the kiss of death to a second term by expanding hate crimes legislation for what the Religious Right considers deviants, is he?

And to tie it all back to the beginning, this is why it's so disgusting that the chairman of a major hookup site like Manhunt would actively support someone like John McCain and why people are so pissed off about it. Because we're never gonna get things like, oh, hate crimes legislation expanded nationally with a Republican in the White House.

Re: Out Magazine article...

It is ironic that Gay sex is funding John McCain’s campaign.

Rotello's larger point is this: sex obsessed Gay men are self-medicating their insecurities, alienating themselves, objectifying each other into abstraction and decimating Gay "communities" WHILE empowering the very hegemonic machine that seeks to destroy them.

The fact that Jonathan Crutchley, one of the founders of Manhunt, is a committed Republican who has donated generously to the McCain campaign proves Rotello's larger point: attempting to assuage insecurity and self-loathing with obsessive behavior and careless choices will destroy you...and us.

Using anything good (like sex, drugs or alcohol) to an ugly extreme is destructive (HIV, liver disease, addiction, death, etc). So, why use Manhunt if it supports Republican power and our own oppression? We can all have a lot of great sex without putting McCain in office, can’t we? In evolutionary terms unless we adapt better to our environment we will quickly become irrelevant…and extinct.

Even without the whole Republican component to this story Gay men need to start thinking about how to have (a lot of great) sex as an expression of self-respect not low self-esteem.

Maybe Jonathan Crutchley is just a shrewd businessman making investments to protect his company and bottom line. Republicans perpetuate anachronistic homophobia for political gain. Manhunt exploits the resultant fear, shame and self-loathing that disfigures normal sexual energy into anonymous sexual networks. Keeping Republicans in office guarantees no expansion of rights for anyone, especially The Gays. Therefore the shame spiral continues perpetuating the need for online sexual outlets, more headless naked pics and ass/dick shots. And Jonathan Crutchley keeps making more money.

Some info on McCain and his Supreme Court choices...

From Catholic News Agency:

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=11558

"On the issue of appointments to the Supreme Court, McCain mentioned that Sam Brownback would play an advisory role in helping decide who he should nominate for the Supreme Court. As models of who he would select, John McCain pointed to Justices Samuel Alito and Antonin Scalia. Pro-life advocates see the choice of Supreme Court Justices as key to overturning the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision, which legalized abortion."

From McCain's website:

http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/NewsReleases/00c94a58-8860-481f-a165-1347855cdc68.htm

"In fact, there is no reason to believe that Mr. McCain will not make excellent appointments to the court. On judicial nominations, he has voted soundly in the past from Robert Bork in 1987 to Samuel Alito in 2006. His pro-life record also provides a surety that he will not appoint judicial activists."

The founder stepped down as chairman? Ha.. sure.. maybe from that title.. Im sure he is still working in his same office with those hideous curtains, making the same $$, with the same responsibilities under his new undercover title... Lets not be too fooled by their little publicity stunt. Btw, i believe the Repubs already gave it back (what a smack in the face.. lol)