Why should LGBT voters continue to put up with this crap?

[dsc]

In the latest version of an anti Dean scorched earth policy it is LGBT voters who are again caught in the crossfire.

That left the anti-Dean forces with only one clear strategy: recycling the long list of his provocative statements. Among them: that we shouldn't judge Osama bin Laden until he has a jury trial; that America won't always have the strongest military; that "if Bill Clinton could be the first black president, I can be the first gay president."<\i> The ABD forces were also pointing reporters to an off-the-record Harvard seminar in November, at which Dean is rumored to have facetiously suggested that Democrats leave Wyoming rather than put up with anti-gay attitudes there. (A Dean spokeswoman says the governor remembers discussing the Matthew Shepherd case, but not the specific remarks about Wyoming. "In any case, his view is that the Democrats need to compete everywhere, including there.")

For readers of Dean's book we know this is the second time that LGBT people were run down to get at Dean. President Clinton famously called up people in Iowa to tell them that Dean "forfeited his right to run for President when he signed a Civil Unions bill."

It is pretty sad when the other political party actually has a gay chairman and no one bats an eye but when we have a person who by his support of gay issues feels a unique tie to us we get people trying to make bigotted hay out of it.

More LGBT voters voted for Kerry than Jewish voters did. By percent, we were more loyal than pro choice voters. Yet we are treated to this crap. Shame on the people pushing this garbage and in the future leave one of your most loyal constituencies out of the crossfire when you decide to go after people running against you for DNC chair.

Link for quoted material about DNC race

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6857146/site/newsweek /

[cyr330]

1. I, for one, won't

I am sick and tired of so-called "DLC" Republicans trying to make the Democratic Party "GOP Lite."

I would never, never, never vote Republican, so why would I want to vote pseudo-Republican? It's just not going to happen. I really don't give a shit whether "Republican Lite" is less odious than the real thing; neither one will get my vote.

[purduejake]

9. I agree with you...

I'm done voting for people just because they are dems and better than the other person. I want somebody who stands up for progress or I will not vote for either democrat or republican. If they want my votes, they have to come back to the left side of politics, and I think the only way to do that is to force them to do it by causing them to hemorrhage votes from their base. Hopefully they'll realize their horrible mistakes and come back to protect our ideals.

[Radical Activist]

2. huh?

Why would anyone who doesn't like Dean criticize LGBT's as a way to attack him? That doesn't make sense to me and I don't know what "forces" you're referring to.

Dean doesn't support a national civil unions bill and thinks it should be left up to the states. Since he has the same position as Dick Cheney I hardly see him as some kind of ardent defender of GLBT issues.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Radical Activist]

6. You should check again

Dean never supported a national civil unions bill. He said it should be left up to the states. So did Edwards. Look it up and you'll see I'm correct.

[dsc]

10. That is baldly false

Dean repeatedly stated that States would have to give all the rights of marriage to gay couples but he would leave it up to them if they called it civil unions or marriage. Edwards position evolved but ended up being that he would give most rights.

[Radical Activist]

23. Know what you're talking about before you call someone a liar

Sadly, HRC has taken the debate transcript off their website. However, quotes from the debates indicate he would encourage states to recognize some level of same-sex partner benefits but would take no federal action to require it. He NEVER supported a national civil unions bill that would require all states to recognize unions. He gave his support for state laws recognizing civil unions, but never a federal one. I challenge you to find a direct quote proving me wrong or apologize for calling me a liar.

[dsc]

27. I can't find the debate transcript either

but I know exactly what he said. He said both in that debate and in campaign literature that he would REQUIRE states to afford those couple the same rights as heterosexual couples. And I didn't call you a liar I said you either didn't know what you were talking about or you were a liar.

[Kipepeo]

33. This is not the debate transcript

but an essay by Dean on gay marriage that I particularly like: http://www.sitnews.us/HowardDean/072004_dean.html

[dsc]

34. Here is Dean on MTP

Note the end of his answer. It is nearly word for word what I said.

Here is the key exchange, after Russert has addressed the question five times:

Russert: Would you, as president, seek the same kind of legislation that now has passed in Canada, allowing formally gays to marry?

Dean: No, because I don't think that is the right of the federal government. I was very much opposed, unlike some of the folks I'm running against, to the Defense of Marriage Act. I did not support the Defense of Marriage Act, because I do not think it's the federal government's business to get involved in what has traditionally been the matter for the states to deal with. But by the same token, I would not tell other states that they had to have a civil union statute or that they had to have a marriage statute. That is the not the province of the federal government. What I will go as president of the United States is insist that every state find a way to recognize the same legal rights for gay couples as they do for everybody else. Equal rights under the law is a fundamental tenet of America, and tha's where we need to be.

[Radical Activist]

41. That seems to confirm what I was saying

He won't force the states to have a law supporting either gay marriage or civil unions because he sees it as a state issue.

He says he would "insist" that the states have a policy recognizing rights, but what does that mean if you aren't going to enact a federal law to that effect? I had two Dean staffers tell me during the campaign that it meant he would use the bully pulpit of the Presidency to encourage the states to enact legislation. That's good, but its not the same as a federal law.

I know I pick on Dean too much but this is an example of why I dislike him. He has a way of sounding like he favors something while he technically doesn't favor it.

[dsc]

43. He repeatedly used words like require, make, etc

those words have a fairly limited meaning.

[Radical Activist]

45. True, he used those words

while also saying he would support no federal law to that effect. So, how is he going to force or insist? Is he going to pout and complain until he gets his way? You can't force a state to do anything if you aren't going to pass a federal law to do so. That makes those words rather empty.

With other politicians we might call that trying to have it both ways, but not with Dean. Dean has backbone so he gets a pass.

"I'm from the democratic wing of the Democratic Party" had a fairly limited meaning too, but when Dean uses it the phrase suddenly no longer means you are a progressive Paul Wellstone style Democrat. Dean is a moderate so I guess it means something new when he says it. I'm just pointing out a pattern here.

[dsc]

46. No he never said he wouldn't support a federal law to that effect

He did say that one would be difficult to pass but he never, as in not once, said he didn't support a law. There is a difference between not support a law requiring Civil Unions (and thus precluding marriage) and not supporting any law which grants the rights. Dean fell into the first category not the second.

[AP]

26. dsc, have you read Lisa Duggan's The Twilight of Equality?

She makes an argument about these issues that I find rock-solid.

I was wondering if you'd be willing to take it on?

[dsc]

28. I actually haven't read the book

so I probably can't unless you can supply a link for me to read or would be willing to wait as I tracked down a copy.

[AP]

29. I'll wait for you to read it.

You will read it though, right?

[dsc]

31. provided I can track down a copy

The library in my town is under construction so I am unsure if they will have it readily available. If they don't then I will check with libraries in the nearby bigger cities.

[AP]

22. Radical Activist is one of the smartest and best informed DU'ers.

And Edwards had the same exact policy as Kerry. He came out with his first. He said that the federal government should grant all the federal rights to same sex couuples that they grant to opposite sex couples. The only think Kerry added a week later was the number of federal rights the government grants.

[Radical Activist]

25. wow

gosh, thanks.

[Runcible Spoon]

52. hey RA!

how's it goin'? :hi:

[dsc]

30. That is wrong

Edwards eventually took the position you state but his first incarnation was that he would decide on a right by right basis.

[AP]

35. I don't know where you got that.

Edwards stated his position a week before Kerry stated his, and they were exactly the same.

[dsc]

36. Edwards gave an interview or answered a questionaire

in which he stated that he would evaluate the rights on a case by case basis. Again, he did evolve but his first position was that the rights would be evaluated on a case by case basis.

[LittleClarkie]

44. Reply message deleted, so I don't know what was said, but

I did appreciate hearing that when Clinton told Kerry he'd have to come out in favor of DOMA somehow, Kerry reportedly said it was not something he could ever do.

I applaud Kerry, Dean, and Kusinich. If I knew how the other candidates felt I'd applaud them too where appropriate.

[IndianaGreen]

3. You are speaking of the same Clinton that signed DOMA?

The same Clinton that was more interested in dipping his wick than he was in defending the right of GLBTs to full equality.

[ultraist]

4. Caught in the crossfire? How?

Does your claim that LGBT voters were more loyal than pro-choice voters include Republican pro-choice voters? How did you draw that conclusion?

[dsc]

8. according to the exit polls

73% of LGBT voters voted for Kerry while just about 2/3 of pro choice voters voted for Kerry. That made us around 7 to 8 percent more loyal.

[ultraist]

11. That must include pro-choice Republicans

I wouldn't consider any Republicans "loyal" or disloyal voters in the context of a Democrat candidate.

Kerry didn't recommend any national legislation, he said, it should be left to the states. We have federal legislation that SHOULD apply, the 14th amdment, EQUAL PROTECTION, IMO.

I think the State should throw out "marriage" altogether as it carries too many religious connotations and issue only civil unions, with all of the same rights/privileges as marriage does now, for ALL couples.

[dsc]

12. Newsflash

most of the LGBT voters who voted for Bush were Republican too. But the measure I am using is the one typically used to measure loyalty of interest groups and I stand behind it.

[ultraist]

15. Fine

I simply don't think using a measure that includes Republicans when discussing loyalty to the Democratic Party is very relevant. JMO.

[dsc]

16. It is very relevant

When we decide whose issue to fight for and whose not to it should matter who brings voters to the table and who doesn't.

[w13rd0]

19. Logistically...

...numbers matter as well though. Female pop = 52% of general pop. GBLT pop = 8-11% of genpop. I agree with you, just thought that should be taken into account in the discussion...

[dsc]

21. pro choice doesn't equal female

I think you actually underestimate your numbers that way. But remember that more numbers also means more voting for Bush given that we are dealing with percents.

[Siyahamba]

7. This makes me respect Dean more.

[ultraist]

13. Kuchinich was more pro gay rights than was Dean

[dsc]

14. Not in 1996 he wasn't

back then Kucinich supported DOMA while he was campaigning for Congress. I'll take the man with a track record of actually getting something done in this regard of the one with great words.

[ultraist]

17. I didn't realize that

Kucinich supported DOMA in 1996. BIG MISTAKE for Democrats to have done this. But, Clinton did backpeddle on our core values in other ways too.

[dsc]

18. Even Wellstone supported DOMA

though he said it was one of his biggest mistakes shortly before he died. People grow in their views over time on issues like this.

[w13rd0]

20. And it's that willingness to grow....

...I think is absolutely VITAL in a political leader in this century. Old world thinking just isn't going to get us anywhere...

[Orangepeel]

24. Clinton called up people in Iowa and told them not to vote for Dean?

Are you saying that's in Dean's book?

."

[Cheswick2.0]

47. Yes

Why is this surprising?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

49. That's Blood Libel IMHO And Demands First, Second, And

Third Party Confirmation...


I want to hear Dean say Clinton did this....


I want to hear a third party testify that Clinton told them not to support Dean because he supports civil unions...


And I want to hear Clinton confirm or deny this story...


In the absence of that I call bullshit and see no difference between this little bit of apocrypha and ancient blood libels such as those that contend that Jews used the blood of gentile children in their preparation of matzoh...

In my best Joseph Welch voice "do some people have no shame"...

[moggie12]

32. If what you said Clinton did is true,

that would be the most ludicrous thing I've ever heard. Did Clinton actually say Dean's civil union stand meant Dean "forfeited his right to run for President"?? This from the guy that couldn't keep his pecker in his pants around an obviously bubble-brained White House intern?? Puh-leease! Clinton making any sex-related statements is like Saddam lecturing us on human rights.

Where exactly does it say Clinton said this?? Can you point me to a link??

[w13rd0]

37. Not robocalls...but...

http://www.google.com/search?q=Clinton+Dean+%22civil+unions%22+%22right+to+run+for+President%22&start=0&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

Yeah, looks like Clinton waxed stupid. But the primaries and the election are over. I know I've been thrown under the bus, I'm just looking for a way to get out from under it before it starts rolling backward.

[moggie12]

38. Thanks for the link

I think I was better off before I came to DU -- I'm learning too much about the ugly intestines of the political process. Ignorance is bliss.

[zulchzulu]

39. Um... "the other political party actually has a gay chairman"

If they knew that Drudge was gay as well as Mehlman, they would haul them off into some secret love nest and make them perform fallatio for Jesus.

Actually, it is a shame that there is a divide and conquer game with the LGBT vote in all this.

But actually, I'm not so sure about Clinton's quote in Iowa. A link would be nice. Remember that it was Clinton that started his first days as president defending his "don't ask, don't tell" policy. He could have bailed, but he didn't.

As for Kerry's record, he has been very supportive of LGBT issues since the 1980s and even before. He has a 100% rating from the Human Rights Campaign...that's...um...pretty good.

As for Dean, no matter what you may think about how he got the bill signed, he still signed the bill when governor in Vermont.

[dsc]

40. It is in Dean's book

and comes from a gay supporter of his who was called by Clinton (I am presuming this person was actually an activist of some sort). The story was widely reported in October when Dean's book came out but any link would only lead back to the book anyhow.

[killbotfactory]

42. What fucking assholes

Taking shit out of context and blowing it out of proportion, scapegoating entire communities. Fuck them.

[Cheswick2.0]

48. It is hard for me to get too upset over your rights and slights

when you do not support my rights. You have also implied on this thread that there is some sort of contest between women and homosexuals for who is more loyal and that those statistics should be used when deciding which issues get supported. Given the numbers, your argument makes no sense. We don't count votes by percentages in an election.

Lucky for you, I have plenty of gay friends and associates who are pro-choice, so I know that you hold a minority point of view, in your community, against abortion rights.

One thing you might want to consider: the people most likely to stand up for your rights and stand beside you at marches and vote for politicians who support your rights are pro-choice women.

There are a hell of a lot more of us than there are of you. Do you want our help or not?

[IndianaGreen]

50. Ouch!

And for those familiar with the background of this feud, it is also painfully true what Cheswick said.

However, the same can be said about pro-choice women that don't give a shit about the right to marry being an essential liberty for gays and lesbians. Some people don't care about equal rights unless they are directly impacted.

[EFerrari]

51. We're beginning to understand how the Black Caucus must

feel, watching all these white people outraged about their votes being tossed out.

In San Francisco in early November, alternately Gavin Newsom, LGBTs or the internet stole the election. Come on, cut it out. The coalition works and we've got to be the grown ups now.

[Cheswick2.0]

54. Oh, there a ton of white people who don't consider Black voter

supression an issue. It 's only really voter supression if it happens to white people. I know quite a few democrats who believe that the real problem in florida in 2000 was that all those black folks and old Jewish people were too stupid to understand the butterfly ballot's arrows.

[EFerrari]

55. Mama. lol! I know. n/t

[Cheswick2.0]

53. yes... and also Black men who think white women

have benefited to much by Affirmative Action and who are also anti-choice.
Sometimes people just don't have the sense to know who their natural allies are.

[IndianaGreen]

56. It's the old divide and conquer routine!

I will never forget the Edward R. Murrow documentary about migrant workers, originally aired in the early 1960s, that I watched a couple of semesters back in a Communications class. Migrant workers shared the same burdens and problems, and were exploited by the same masters, yet they could not even meet in the same church to discuss their problems because they were keeping themselves apart from one another because of race. The white migrants met only with whites, the black migrants met only with blacks.

[American Tragedy]

57. Regardless of whether he said it, I tend to agree with Dean.

Wyoming went to Bush by about 40%, surpassed only by Utah in sheer redness. It has two right-wing Republican Senators and a Republican Congresswoman, and a mostly Republican State Senate. It seems that there are a few areas of this country in which progressives are simply doomed to oppression and political irrelevance, at least for the foreseeable future.

I know this probably sounds insensitive, but maybe Dems should consider relocating to places of greater solidarity, especially LGBT & other minorities, rather than put up with it. It would certainly be more politically expedient to concentrate some of those populations in purple and blue states.

Perhaps our finite time and resources would be better served with a 45 state strategy.