“Goode Linked to Gay Movie.”

When life hands you a lemon, make lemonade.

When the Danville Register-Bee hands you the headline “Goode Linked to Gay Movie,” make…um…gay-ade. (With that just-out-of-the-closest freshness that can’t be beat.)

Now, Eden’s Curve doesn’t look like porn, per se. Let’s go with gay erotica. IMDB says that if you enjoyed “Eden’s Curve,” you may also enjoy “Eating Out,” “Eating Out 2: Sloppy Seconds,” and “Head On.”

Last I checked, Rep. Virgil Goode still has eight points on challenger Tom Perriello. I wonder how many points being tied to a gay quasi-pornographic film—no matter how tenuous that connection—is good for at the polls?

More from Tim Craig, The Huffington Post, Beliefnet, and The Hook.

Published by Waldo Jaquith

Waldo Jaquith (JAKE-with) is an open government technologist who lives near Char­lottes­­ville, VA, USA. more »

8 replies on ““Goode Linked to Gay Movie.””

  1. I really wish that the subject matter of the film weren’t what is getting the most attention. Sure, it’s funny. But that’s really beside the point.

    A rather sizeable, unrelated earmark was placed in the 2004 appropriations bill for the Dept. of Veterans Affairs for the benefit of a friend of Goode’s. Where the rest of us would see a chance to honor our veterans, Goode saw the opportunity to hide a $150K handout. THAT is what should be the focus, here.

  2. ‘Live boy or a dead girl.’

    This could give Periello a real fighting chance at winning, IF Tom was willing to run lots of negative ads against Virgil hitting him on this. However, anyone who knows anything about Tom Periello will probably agree that there is no way that Tom would go hard negative with this. He’s just not that kind of guy.

  3. Gotta love the comments appended after the Danville Register and Bee article. If word gets out further around the district, Goode is sunk — if not by people changing votes, then by conservatives who don’t vote at all.

    Perriello should just take the high road and not mention it. He’s the white knight here. Word will hopefully get around without him being actively involved.

  4. Not really an attack I’d like to push. Let them wallow in their own filth. We know very well that the political benefit of this doesn’t come from revulsion at hypocrisy, but general disgust with gay people. An ugly thing to traffic in, I think.

  5. Maybe Tom could just invite Virg to join him in a roundtable discussion – as an acknowledged patron-of-the-gay-people. That way we could set this nonsense aside and start working on the real problems in Southside. Of course if Virgil doesn’t want to show up Tom could talk about how folks are getting played by the Republicans – and show them a really nice educational video clip.

  6. Yeah, I think the whole thing is altogether too a) distasteful and b) tenuous to be pursued by, well, anybody. I think I’m right that it could influence the election, but that would only be by providing voters with information of no higher a quality than in a whisper campaign, and that doesn’t seem like a great way to win an election.

  7. Explanations from the Goode campaign that the credit in the film to Goode goes to his support for the theatre, not the film, seem credible. If that isn’t a good place to spend federal tax money, talk about that. Aren’t there enough real issues surrounding Mr. Goode that this sort of thing should be ignored? He is surely the most embarrassing political figure from Virginia (no small accomplishment, that).

Comments are closed.