DNC gay fundraiser starting to fall apart over rupture between Obama and gay community

[FreeState]

http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/dnc-gay-fundraiser-starting-to-fall.html

DNC gay fundraiser starting to fall apart over rupture between Obama and gay community
by John Aravosis (DC) on 6/15/2009 07:30:00 PM
Note to our friends in the media. This is a story deserving a little national attention. It seems the Obama folks have gotten to the mainstream media - you'll note that practically none of the corporate media are covering the growing rupture between Obama and the gay community other than on their blogs, even after HRC sent probably the first chastising letter to a Democratic president since 1996 (and reporters always have told me in the past, it's not a story until HRC weighs in - well now they have, twice). Guess that means we'll just have to ramp up the pain.

Speaking of pain, top gay blogger Andy Towle contacted me today to let me know that this morning he contacted the DNC to let them know that he will no longer be attending their big gay fundraiser later this month with VP Joe Biden (yet another reason we like Andy and his blog). The DNC had planned to raise a lot of money from gay A-listers by coinciding this fundraiser with the 40th anniversary of Stonewall. Instead, the DNC may be about to witness Stonewall 2.0.

(Oddly, we've heard nothing in four days, since the DOMA brief scandal broke, from gay congressional leaders - Barney Frank, Tammy Baldwin, and Jared Polis - all of whom are hosting this rather ill-timed and inappropriate Democratic effort to milk money from our community at the same time Democrats are equating us with incest and not lifting a finger on any of our legislation priorities in Congress or the White House. It's not awfully clearly why any gay person would give a Democrat a dime ever again. Check back, we'll be updating you daily on whether Barney, Tammy and Jared ever decide to say boo about the hate brief and their role in this fundraiser that is quickly turning into a major fiasco for the Democratic party.)

Andy's announcement comes on the heel of word that veteran gay advocate, and longtime friend of Bill Clinton, David Mixner is pulling out the fundraiser as well. David wrote one hell of an essay this weekend about the hateful DOMA brief the Obama administration submitted late Thursday night. David is an amazing person. I met him for the first time when I was sitting in Senator Moseley-Braun's office, back in like 1993, waiting for a friend who worked there. David walked in for a meeting with someone, I recognized him, and walked up and introduced myself, and thanked him for standing up to President Clinton on Don't Ask Don't Tell. We talked for, what, 20 seconds? The next time I saw David was easily a good five years later. He immediately recognized me and said "I met you at Senator Moseley-Braun's office!" He is one scary dude. :-)

Good - I know Im not giving another dime to any politician thats not 100% pro-gay civil rights and have a plan they can show me along with a history of action and support on all GLBT fronts.

[xchrom]

1. recommend

[ruggerson]

2. I'll be interested to see how

Jeremy Bernard and Rufus Gifford react to this. They raised many millions of dollars for Obama in CA (I believe they were his largest fundraisers). Gifford was rewarded with the job of Finance Director for the DNC and Bernard became the WH liaison to the Nat'l Endowment for the Humanities. They're both going to have a lot of extremely angry people to deal with.

[Mari333]

3. knr

[Toasterlad]

4. Ditto. No More Money - Or Votes - For DINOs. Step Up, Or Step Aside.

[GodlessBiker]

5. A BIG +1!!

[donco6]

6. I know Jared pretty well.

I'm going to give his office a call about this and see why he's still attending. Should be interesting.

[FreeState]

7. Please be sure to post his reply!

and send it to AmericaBlog too if you want - Im sure John would appreciate it.

[donco6]

10. Will do. n/t

[Toasterlad]

9. I Hope Someone Is Going to Publish a List of People Who Attend.

I'd like to make sure that none of them get any money from me ever again.

[ruggerson]

102. Apparently they're going to videotape who attends

[Toasterlad]

103. Excellent. SHAME ON YOU, MOTHERFUCKERS!

[Luminous Animal]

8. K&R!

[AntiFascist]

11. Obama probably has the financial backing of Saudi Arabia...

he doesn't need the gays anymore.

[mtnester]

18. Nah, just their bankers

at this point, that leap is a 2" one.

:)

[QC]

12. Anyone who attends this thing should never get another dime from anyone. n/t

[greeneyedboy]

13. I don't think they anticipated how fast this would snowball.

Having rights that we had gotten used to taken away by popular vote is quite a different feeling than having a theoretical right preempted.

I don't think Obama and his team anticipated how much Prop 8 radicalized our community, or how fast other states would act on equality.

Time for more than just words, NOW.

[roody]

14. Good. Quit giving your money to politicians who don't

support you.

[roughsatori]

15. knr

[GodlessBiker]

16. knr

[Boomerang Diddle]

17. If it's on the internet it must be true......

:crazy:

[GivePeaceAchance]

19. This is the thing they are a very wealthy voting block. So to be completely honest Pres has to ...

acknowledge that. No-one likes to waste money. Hard workers not always large famalies it's a community all of america should be reaching out to in hard economic times, star treatment even.

[readmoreoften]

78. Point to note: LGBT people are not a "very wealthy voting block".

The wealthiest LGBT people (along with outspoken bloggers, etc.) get noticed by politicians and invited to these functions. It's the same with straight people. Just like straight people, you only ever see or hear about the wealthiest or most media-active members of our community. It'd be like saying that African-Americans are a very wealthy demographic because of the wealth of a few media performers and the cost of the meal at an NAACP invitation-only meeting with the Obamas.

Studies have shown that LGBT people are, on average, poorer and paid less than heterosexuals. White LGBTs earn less than heterosexual LGBTs. African-American LGBTs earn less than heterosexual AAs. Same with latino LGBTs--you get the picture.

If were were actually "a very wealthy voting block" we'd be listened to, because that's pretty much the only thing that either party seems to give a damn about.

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[LostinVA]

117. Gay people earn less than heterosexual people

Gay couples earn less than heterosexual couple. The "Wealthy Gay" meme is a myth.

[Mari333]

20. k

[closeupready]

21. The DNC doesn't seem to need or want support from GLBT families & friends

So it's hard to blame the GLBT community. And I say that as a gay Democrat myself.

[DURHAM D]

43. They still want our money.

The national treasurer of the DNC is gay. Many now see him (Tobias) as a turncoat because he did nothing while Dean and Leah Daughtrey marginalized/stripped gay staff members and stopped providing help to the state organizations fighting off petitions, etc.

Meanwhile Dean and Leah (read that Donna Brazile's buddy) added "gay fundraisers" to target our expendable income. Think about it - the CEO Leah Daughtrey is an evangelical minister. Does anyone really wonder why the new "Democratic" regime is so anti-gay.

[closeupready]

50. Of course, they want our money, yes. That's correct. They ain't gonna get it, though.

Like that song,

No, no, you ain't gonna get it,
no, no, you're never gonna get it!

[Soylent Brice]

22. K&R

[Doc Martin]

23. No more money!

Here is an e-mail I just sent the DNC

"No more money... that is what I am telling LGBT democratic friends

Does President Obama support the LANGUAGE and the REASONING in the recent DOMA bill? I am not asking if he felt obliged to file a brief to defend that law.

The language and reasoning in that brief are deeply offensive and hurtful to me.

I worked tirelessly for Obama's election. Is he just another politician?"

[HarryTrumanDem]

37. well........................

I worked tirelessly for Obama's election. Is he just another politician?"

Yep.

Or as the freaks said back in the 60s
"don't vote; it just encourages 'em."

That said, a whole bunch of "Democrats" supported 8 in CA (the ones who attend church, most likely). Even most Paul-tards and libertarian sorts opposed 8.

[Mithreal]

24. K&R nt

[ooglymoogly]

25. We supported and maned the phones and voted for change, we did not vote

for a changeling. The spigot from this household is off except for proven progressives and that's a fact.

[Cherchez la Femme]

26. Not one more gay dime for O'DOMA

What would he want with our gay, incestuous, child-molesting dollars anyway?
We all must have a lot of them since obviously we pay no taxes --hence aren't deserving of receiving any meager tax dollars back-- never mind we earned benefits same as anybody else! (Bitter? You bet)

Obviously that's the only way to get O'DOMA's attention: Money.
Our humanity doesn't cut it, so what else will? Our supposed fashion sense?

But will even money stand against his desire to please fundies & homophobes and his apparent disgust & arrogance towards LGBTQ?


Color me unsurprised at all this. Karma's gonna get ya, even if you're the president ...doesn't matter if a Dem or Repuke president is his successor.
Well, a DEM pres -- the Repuke one's get away with murder
Literally.



edit: grammar

[Vidar]

27. Good. He should lose his gay/lesbian support, as well as his union support & anti-war support.

[Deja Q]

33. Now, along with all the pissing and moaning, I'd like to see what people have as substitute actions

Nothing wrong with complaining, just so long as there's even brainstorming to think of something new that works.

(people in the lounge have called me worse things for less... and I'm not calling anybody anything. Yet.)

[Marr]

44. The only solution is a long term one.

Build from the bottom up, beginning on the local level, and just take the thing over. Also, current DINO's should be allowed to lose. A politician who runs as a progressive and immediately does an about face to service the corporatocracy upon election should expect to be a one-term politician.

There is no short term solution, and certainly no fix that will benefit us in the next national election.

[roody]

66. I'm a Green and I just concluded that we have to challenge

them in the Democratic primaries.

[readmoreoften]

82. There are only four things that can actually be done:

1) Change your mind and start believing that the wars are good, that unions are irrelevant, that LGBT people are too unpopular to have rights, that access to healthcare is a privilege, and that bankers need bailouts because your party has decided it so.

2) Try to take over the Democratic party and turn it into an actual opposition party.

3) Align with a third party.

4) Rethink the value of the electoral system under capitalism. Organize outside the structure of parties to foment mass resistance around various issues--LGBT rights, labor rights, health care rights, ending the war--and tirelessly organizing towards a mass uprising (not guerrilla uprising, but mass uprising) leading to a complete transformation of our social structure so that we can avoid mutual ruin.

I personal advocate for #2 or #4.

[defendandprotect]

39. as well as his liberal/progressive support . . . and that's a lot of people ....

who will need a place to go --

What's Plan B?

[readmoreoften]

84. Unions took a long time to warm up to him anyway. And he was no credibility in the antiwar movement.

The only thing that shocks me in all of this is how quickly he dropped the facade. I thought it would be speechifying and press conferences throughout. But apparently that's only for the campaign trail. Instead the approach has been promoting him like he's an advertisement in the Lifestyle Section of a men's magazine.

[Echo In Light]

28. K&R

[Kitsune]

29. No money for bigots, no votes for bigots.

Equality across the board or GTFO.

[TexasObserver]

30. I hate to say it, but the president has completely sold out gays.

I accepted his campaign posturing because that was a campaign, but I expected him to do much better in office. He's been weak and disappointing on all matters related to gays. Cowardly, even.

[konnichi wa]

31. Likewise. I must confess I'm actually more puzzled than pissed...

but pissed is catching up real fast.

[Deja Q]

32. wasn't the late great Paul Wellstone for DOMA too?

And he was otherwise the most pro-GLBT person you could find.

Be careful which bridges you choose to burn.

I've always wanted to say that...

[MannyGoldstein]

34. I Think It's More Than Simply Defending DOMA

It's the comparisons that the DOJ brief used in DOMA's defense - incest and child marriage.

[dflprincess]

41. Wellstone did vote for DOMA - but repented that vote before he died

I believe he said that he had had no idea how much that vote would hurt people and it was not until after the vote and his constituents educated him that he realized what he'd done. At least he listened and at least he'd admit he was wrong.

[Captain Hilts]

57. It was an election year gimmic that even Barb Mikulski voted in favor.

[dflprincess]

58. That's true. I wonder if the mistake he made with DOMA

helped him make his decision to vote against the IWR even though his advisors told him a vote against it would doom his reelection. He did say that regardless of the election, he had to cast a vote he could live with. (He did go up in the polls after the IWR vote).

[Captain Hilts]

59. Could be. Hard to say. nt

[jhrobbins]

68. No one ever really had to worry at the polls if they voted against GLBT issues

so, I'm inclined to think it wasn't a gimmick.



From Wikipedia:
In 1996, he voted in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act, which allowed states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states and also excluded gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered married couples from receiving equal treatment under federal immigration, tax, welfare, Social Security and inheritance legislation.<9> His vote angered many of his long-time supporters in the LGBT community, and it didn't help his cause when he explained that he voted because he didn't believe in re-defining marriage. However, he later asked his supporters to educate him on the issue and by 2001, when he wrote his autobiography, Conscience of a Liberal, Wellstone admitted that he had made a mistake.

[Captain Hilts]

76. Right. It forced a lot of Dems to vote in favor of it purely for electoral reasons. Sad. nt

[Fearless]

35. This is the smartest thing I've seen posted here in a long time...

On this topic. No figure pointing. No accusing or blaming. Just action. K&R!

[William769]

36. K&R!

I made up my mind awhile ago that no one is getting anymore of my money with just words. I have always said hit them where it hurts! ANd before anyone one says anything about this helping the other side, then I say good! Because when it comes to my civil liberties, I don't see a difference in either side.

[defendandprotect]

38. Why in hell would gays be giving money to DNC....?? For the favors?

I wouldn't give any money to the organization, anyway.

Give directly to candidates if you must --

but we should ALL also be targeting candidates to oust them from the party.

[Bluenorthwest]

40. Anyone who attends that farce

will be over and done.
No nothing for the DNC or for any semi-advocates. No way. No how.

[closeupready]

52. Let's keep a list here of attendees.

I want to know who goes.

[LostinVA]

42. Not one more cent

[Eyerish]

45. knr

[AlbertCat]

46. We can all use that money to take a vacation somewhere gay friendly

[theHandpuppet]

53. Excellent suggestion!

Support the states that support US. Let them know we appreciate their support and let all of America know that equal rights for all is good for business!

[AntiFascist]

55. Excellent idea!

The LGBT community and our supporters should use some of their disposable income to vacation in the states where gay marriage is legal.

[AlbertCat]

56. Support the states that support US.

I was thinking more like the Netherlands. I'd love to check out the Hague and the Vermeer Museum.

But, y'know, New England is lov-er-ly this time of year too.

[PVnRT]

122. Iowa has, uh, corn.

You like corn, right?

[cascadiance]

60. Well, if I can get employed again, I'll make a point to going back to Univ. of Iowa this fall...

... and visiting friends there. And also to underline helping out with this too.

Still wondering if Iowa City's economy is picking up at all now with the advent of gay weddings now in the state. It would seem like a very logical place for couples (especially those in the midwest) to schedule them now. I have to believe there's some good business opportunities to help set up such events, especially in a gay friendly area like Iowa City there too.

[Tesha]

106. I understand Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Massachusetts, and Connecticut will be popular this year

Iowa too, but the skiing's not as hot ;).

Tesha

[Starry Messenger]

47. Good.

They need to come correct on this thing. This is a disturbing pattern. I'm glad the bloggers are taking a stand. I won't be giving any more money to any politician that is not 100% either.

[keepCAblue]

48. K&R n/t

[maxintexas]

49. Wish I had the money back...

... that I squandered supporting Obama.

[hardtoport]

51. I already stopped wasting my money on the DNC anyway,

But I just wanted to express my solidarity with the GLBT community on this. I also wanted to say I hope more GLBT candidates run for office.

[HillWilliam]

54. Not one thin damn dime

We live hand-to-mouth as it is and it's damned hard to come up with the donations we do. We gave generously to the Obama campaign. Never friggin' again. My partner went and re-registered Green. I'm not ready to make that leap, but I'll be damned if I'm opening my wallet again until I see some action in the proper direction. All we've gotten so far is the steady THUMP-THUMP of the bus-wheels rolling over the LGBT community. Fuck that.

They want money and time from us? They've had it endlessly. Now it's time to give something back. Nothing's for nothing any more.

[WeDidIt]

61. Can't say that I blame the GLBT community

Every day seems a new disappointment out fo teh Obama administration.

[Skittles]

112. he's disappointing everyone who cares about civil rights for all

[Neecy]

62. Good. Starve the beast.

The only GLBT persons who show up for the fundraiser should be outside of it - loudly protesting. Shame the handful who enter.

[Libertas1776]

63. It seems All Obama

is succeeding in doing is splintering the Democratic vote between progressives, gays, anti-war and the rest, providing an opportunity for the Rethugs to swoop in and win come election time. Oh God, Maybe he really is a secret Republican operative. It is pretty ingenious if you think about it, the RNC labels him a big evil socialist (even though so far he has proven himself to be barely moderate right) but secretly receives a big fat check from Steele himself. BINGO I have solved it :silly:

All "humor" aside, if I don't see any real change from our supposed Democratic president, the Dems can seriously eat it.

[Mattylock]

64. Legal Briefing

I have to take exception to the meme that is going about that the DOJ brief compared homosexuality to pedophilia and incest. That is not true. The DOJ brief contains the most relevant case authority about the issue being argued. Just so happens that some of those cases involve pedophilia and incest. If there is better case authority out there than the cases being complained about, I'd like to know about it. There is no way the DOJ set out to make offensive comparisons to homosexuality. The case law is the case law. Not a lot of choice about using it.

[DURHAM D]

67. You are late to the party and way behind the learning curve. nt

[LooseWilly]

91. The arguments based on standing were more than enough arguments for the brief.

They were persuasive enough to satisfy any constitutional requirements that the law be defended.

Meanwhile, the choice to even include the case law is demonstrative of a lack of real interest in overturning the law.

And as for the defense that "the case law is the case law"... that may be so... but if you look at the argument itself, you'll realize that it is saying: "Just because Indiana allows a girl to get married at 16, doesn't mean that New Jersey needs to acknowledge that marriage... and likewise, just because California let this same sex couple get married, doesn't mean that other should be forced to acknowledge that marriage."... the brief then goes on to say "Just because New Mexico allowed a pair of first cousins to get married, doesn't mean that Arizona should be required to acknowledge that marriage, and likewise, just because California allowed this same sex couple to get married, that doesn't mean that other states should have to acknowledge that marriage"...

In other words... no it didn't "compare homosexuality to pedophilia and incest"... it just compared homosexual marriages to marriages that some states consider to be incestuous and/or pedaphilic. Sure, those are two different things, just like being shot with a .44 magnum is not the same thing as being shot with a .45 ACP... but the similarity is greater than the differences, if you ask me.

Law may be about semantics... but you might want to take a minute and examine what the citation of case law sounds like if you translate it back to English...

[Toasterlad]

104. But To The Apologists, That Difference Is As Wide As the Grand Canyon.

Any twisted argument they can use to justify their noses up Obama's ass, they'll use. Any rational person reading that brief knows that homosexuality was effectively equated with incest and pedophilia, but the apologists jump on that word "effectively" with both feet and argue that just because it doesn't come right out and SAY that homos are the same as incestuous pedophiles, that Obama is the patron saint of homosexuality.

Such luxury...to be able to afford such delusions of benevolence when they aren't YOUR rights being taken away.

[LostinVA]

118. Name noted

[FunMe]

65. Here's the list (leaked email) ... per Pam's House Blend

Come help celebrate that progress and propel it forward Thursday, June 25, in Washington: the DNC's 10th Annual LGBT Leadership Council Dinner.

If you can't make the date, take a rain check and help anyway? SUZE ORMAN just signed on that way. ELIZABETH BIRCH signed on that way. Lots of others.

If you CAN make the date, you'll be joining the Vice President of the United States . .

. . . along with Virginia Governor / DNC Chair Tim Kaine . . . immediate past DNC Chair Howard Dean . . . Chairman Barney Frank . . . Representatives Tammy Baldwin and Jared Polis . . . Vermont Senate President Pete Shumlin . . . District of Columbia Mayor Adrian Fenty . . . David Mixner . . . Richard Socarides . . . The Task Force's Rea Carey . . . HRC's Marty Rouse . . . ESPA's Alan Van Capelle . . . GLAD's Mary Bonauto . . . NBJC's Alexander Robinson . . . GMHC's Marjorie Hill . . . The Victory Fund's Chuck Wolfe . . . Towle Road's Andy Towle . . . Iraq Marine vet Brian Fricke (whom you may have seen on 60 Minutes) . . . Billy Bean . . . Joan Garry . . . Keith Boykin . . . Ray Buckley . . . Brian Johnson . . . Corey Johnson . . . Dixon Osburn . . . Paul Smith . . . Bruce Bastian . . . Mitchell Gold . . . Krystal Ball . . . and so many others, like YOU, who have been pushing the ball down the field for so long.

http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/11487/politely-ask-barney-frank-tammy-baldwin-and-jared-polis-why-they-are-hosting-a-dnc-fundraiser


UPDATE: David Mixner, Towel road's Andy Towle, and Alan Van Capelle, Executive Director of the Empire State Pride Agenda and Foundation have pulled out.

[DURHAM D]

69. And right now HRC/DNC is furiously trying to convince Obama that he has to show up -

to help save face for HRC, DNC and the White House.

And frankly, if he does I don't give a shit. Too late.

[theHandpuppet]

83. Sure he'll show up...

As long as its our money he's after. Then he can offer up some meaningless platitudes and call on us again in 2012.

[zipplewrath]

71. Warren

Anybody invite Rick Warren yet?

[mitchtv]

73. well, headlining is proven phobe Tim Kaine

can't get more toxic

[Toasterlad]

105. Seriously...Kaine's Presence Alone Is Reason Enough to Boycott.

[LostinVA]

120. Kaine is WORSE than Warren, imo

[LostinVA]

119. Frank and Balwin's offices are both getting calls from me in about 30 minutes

[liberation]

70. Maybe Obama and the rest of the Dem brass may some day learn...

... that a winning smile is not enough to make some people forget the tire marks from the bus that just ran over their backs?

I am not holding my breath. But... at some point Obama needs to learn that "pragmatism" does not mean "to request your base to compromise and cater to the whims of your political opponents."

Good on the GLBT community, I say.

[Technowitch]

72. Just got an 'Action Alert' re: healthcare

In the past, I'd found such things encouraging. Now, with that abominable DOJ brief I was sorely tempted to write back with something like the following:

--------------------
Dear President Obama,

Why should I believe you? Why should I bother to help push any sort of healthcare reform when the laws your administration apparently supports wholeheartedly say that I am an unmarried single woman, not in a family? Why should I help when you seem to have no problem equating my 11 year marriage with incest and pedophilia? Why should I believe you care at all about people like me when you have left in place policies that give the bums rush to anyone even suspected of being gay or lesbian in the military, but display complete tolerance towards white power fanatics and neo-nazis serving?

Why should I put my effort behind a healthcare plan that will almost certainly make me and my wife pay higher premiums than heterosexual married couples? Oh, right -- denying us civil rights allegedly saves the government money, yet another of the reasons cited for supporting the abominable DOMA law.

In short, why should I believe you care? So far, I haven't seen jack.

[Lisa0825]

80. I responded to that very same message today!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5860780

[mitchtv]

107. the bum's rush

Ha, that's an old one

[glinda]

74. All of this seems really strange to me. Do we know who composed and sent the memo originally?

Maybe it was a hold over from Bush? I just don't get it? It seems really hostile. I say this as a straight person observing this.

[DURHAM D]

85. Please see response 67 above. nt

[jmondine]

75. I hate to say it, but Karma is a beeyotch

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

77. The president falsely believes that all he needs to win is a coalition of...

blacks (I'm black), Hispanics, DINO's and a small number of Independents.

He forgets that some of the most enthusiastic supporters came from the LGBT and other progressive communities.

The president seems to believe that he can throw us under the bus and hold on to a 'slim majority' without us. He believes that we will not hold him accountable...perhaps we'll 'come around' come election time, as many of us did with Clinton.

I don't know why but it seems as though he is sabotaging his chances at a meaningful, successful legacy. I cannot understand why he is blatantly turning his back on progressive activists, who without us, he would not be president.

[glitch]

93. I think he's attempting to bring disaffected Republicans into the "big tent".

And apparently he has to kick out quite a few of the existing longterm tenants to make room...

[liberation]

99. That possibility would point towards the fact that maybe Obama does not understand

that "keeping your friends close and your enemies closer" is a figure of speech regarding the need to keep tabs on your enemies.... not making alliances with them in detriment of your friends.

It could be a possibility. You never know...

[glitch]

108. Yeah. Make new friends but keep the old.

Only he can't have these particular new friends without dumping his old ones, the new friends won't allow it.
Another valuable lesson my mom taught me when I was young: When one friend asks you to choose between them and another, always choose the other.

[liberation]

98. Indeed, I think Obama is doing a terrible political miscalculation...

... taking human decency concerns, for a second, and focusing on political triangulation. Obama seemed to bet that alienating 10% of the population, who tend to vote overwhelmingly Dem, in an attempt to cater to the fundie elements (which may account for another 10% of the population) was a good move. Never mind that the same fundie block would rather stick white hot iron rods in their eye sockets than vote Dem.

So basically we're back to the old DLC voting strategy book: alienate your base to cater a voting block that would never vote for you.

Brilliant!

So either Obama is taking advice from some very daft political advisers, or someone sabotaged his dictionary and messed the definition of "pragmatic" on purpose.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

125. He's falling into the same trap that Clinton fell into. Clinton's actions ushered the

Republican Revolution.

I'm not sure why he's doing this.

Progressives will stay home or vote 3rd party.

I'm so sick and tired of milquetoast, spineless Dems. He goes out of his way to kiss Republicans' ass, but he's alienating his base, hoping that we'll just fall in line and forget about how much he has disappointed us.

The advice he's relying on are DLC-Clintonista "DemoCRAPs" who led us down the wrong road. If he continues down the DLC-Clintonista path, the Republicans will be back in power in 2010!!

[MikeE]

79. I just got an email asking for money today

My response was that I had given more time and money in support of this administration than any previous one. However, as a result of the administration's reprehensible defense of DOMA, (comparing LGBT relationships to incest), I reuse to give one more moment of my time or one more cent of my money.

There are plenty of organizations that are actually working for our rights.

[Lisa0825]

81. Excellent! I did the same!

:woohoo:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5860780

[beaglelover]

87. me too. n/t

.

[readmoreoften]

86. My guess is that we get some kind of porcelain pony figurine in 2011 so he can say he cares.

Something like the overturning of DADT combined with a mass-marketing campaign to get LGBT youth all signed up to die in Pakistan after the current troops are triaged from their 4th stoploss and the IRR is spent. Or when the AWOL rate is so high they can't sustain it.

OR, we might get a hate crimes bill full of poison pills.

Or something like federal legislation that secures the right of LGBT people not to lose their children so long as they submit evidence of non-perversion to the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives.

[bluedawg12]

113. To remind us

that marrying a pony is illegal, according to some recent legal documents. :eyes:

[LiberalArkie]

88. I will never send any money until I see some action,, Definitely not to Lincoln or Pryor

[marshall]

89. Meanwhile Cheney is out stumping for marriage equality

Maybe it's time somebody identified an Obama family member who is GLBT--that seems to be what it takes to turn the tide of personal opinion. Well, except for Alan Keyes--as far as he's concerned his daughter is going burn in hell.

[burning rain]

90. Seems to me, anyone who attends that fundraiser and ponies up a check....

is not showing proper self-respect, respect for the gay community, and all fellow citizens. I give great weight to pragmatism and will be voting all-Democratic in the 2010 and 2012 general elections, but fundraising and primaries are good basic times to reward good behavior and punish bad within the party. And this is really appalling behavior. If Democrats want to raise money on gay issues at this point, they'd be more credible holding a fundraiser with anti-gay evangelicals.

[Toasterlad]

95. The Only Way to REALLY Send a Message Is to Go All the Way.

That means not just withholding money, but votes as well. Find yourself a nice progressive candidate who is for full equality (they do exist) and don't fall for the trap that the democrats are our only option. That's only as true as we let it be. Stop letting them hold you and your vote hostage. Only when they realize that they absolutely cannot count on our votes unless they truly represent us will they change.

[readmoreoften]

97. I agree, but I'm not so sure that the people in power these days even care too much about votes.

They care, but I'm not sure how much. I think the important thing is for American voters to start realizing that a choice between two candidates on the payroll of homophobes, the financial industry, the insurance industry, big Pharma, agrobusiness, and the military-industrial complex is not democracy.

[Toasterlad]

100. Exactly. That's Why We Must Support and Nurture True Progressives.

The only reason Dennis Kucinich is allowed to live is because the Powers That Be consider him a harmless nutjob who'll never get any further than he is right now. Imagine what would happen if we threw all the support behind Dennis that we've wasted on corporate whores like Obama and Clinton?

[Deep13]

92. What do they (DNC) expect?

Gay-equality activists are seeing the party as a bad investment.

[liberation]

101. As long as there is no viable 3rd party... The dems can safely assume those votes ain't going

to the GOP. Which is all they care about.

The silly "winner takes all" system we got, leads to situations in which political parties do not have to earn a vote... as much as they are interested in said vote not going to the opposing party.

A "lost" gay vote, is of no big concern to the Dems, as long as it does not go to the GOP... said "lost vote" pretty much counts as a "Dem" vote. Which may explain the political strategy of the Dems in the past decade or so, since they seem to have no problem alienating elements of their base... simply because they can safely assume those votes are not going to end up in the side of the GOP, so they can just concentrate in courting moderate GOPers instead. Heck, if you really think about it, that explains Obama's strategy down to a T.


It also explains the collective freak out, and victimization of people like Nader by the Dem establishment, and diehard Dem supporters. A viable 3rd party, would then void some of the previous assumptions I stated above under which the Dem political machine seems to be operating. I think the Dems were mad at the Greens et al, mostly because their viability would force them (the dems) to actually earn some of the votes they had safelly assumed to be theirs. That is why a lot of the anti-Nader arguments I have read regarding the 2000 elections, seem to operate under the assumption that those votes for Nader were literally property of the Dems... and that he stole them somehow. Not in those words, but the gist of their argument is basically that...

I can understand Obama's attempt to be the president of everybody, and not being overly favorable to a specific subsection of the population. However, he seems to always err towards the conservative spectrum...

[justiceischeap]

123. I've been saying since before Obama was elected

That we need to put up a gay candidate for President and then get the gay community to vote for him or her no matter the outcome. It would do several things, it would show just how powerful our voting bloc is, it would invest money in a decent candidate (even if said candidate doesn't win) and it will show that the gay community can no longer be used as a tool to be discarded once the votes are counted.

I'm trying to find info on any kind of demonstration happening that night and if there is one, I will be attending.

[Name removed]

94. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[momdogz]

96. I'm hetero, I voted for Obama, and this is despicable. Time to get REALLY

LOUD again - un-F-ing believable.

[Mark Twain Girl]

109. Not a damn cent for the lot of 'em, bigots all. My money is going to local charities

and human rights groups.

[David Zephyr]

110. Good. No gay dollars to bigot and cowards.

Zip.

[Toasterlad]

111. I Dearly Hope That None of the Attendees Are Going to Fall For That Insulting Bribe

Obama just handed out...especially when the message is clear: this has them in a panic. Now is not the time to ease up on the pressure.

"What if you held a fundraiser and nobody came?" That would be fantastic.

[NMMNG]

114. Maybe Rick Warren, FOTF, AFA and Donnie McClurkin can throw a fundraiser.

They seem to be of more importance these days than we and our families are. :shrug:

[4lbs]

115. Shouldn't the gay and lesbian community actually be increasing their funds to candidates?

That's how they will gain more political power.

How do you think the drug companies, health insurance, the NRA, and oil industry, got their political clout? By pouting and closing their wallets?

Nope, they massively increased their fundraising and financial support for candidates. Candidates that weren't necessarily in their corners before are staunchly in them now.

Refusing to give money to candidates just simply will cause them to seek it elsewhere, to the detriment of the gay community. The people that will then fund them likely won't give two shakes about the gay community. Then, neither will the candidates.

Increase the funding and you increase your political lobbying power.

[Toasterlad]

116. I'm Flattered That You Think I Can Compete Monetarily With the Drug Companies.

I'd say that boycotting the politicians is a pretty sound strategy, given how fast President Integrity got his little doggie bone together. Unfortunately, we're not nearly as easily bought as he thinks we are.

[LostinVA]

121. I'm withholding my money and my vote

[justiceischeap]

124. Withholding money from candidates is exactly what we need to do

However, the money we withhold should then be given to candidates that support the gay community, no matter who they are and where they govern. I also think, as I stated in a post above, that we (the gay community) should be putting forward our own candidates, because should those candidates win, THAT'S how we gain power by being represented.