Don't Ask, Don't Give (From our friends at Americablog)

[DainBramaged]

The boycott is cosponsored by Daily Kos, Jane Hamsher of FireDogLake, Dan Savage, Michelangelo Signorile, David Mixner, Andy Towle and Michael Goff of Towle Road, Paul Sousa (Founder of Equal Rep in Boston), Pam Spaulding, Robin Tyler (ED of the Equality Campaign, Inc.), Bil Browning for the Bilerico Project, and soon others.

It's really more of a "pause," than a boycott. Boycotts sounds so final, and angry. Whereas this campaign is temporary, and is only meant to help some friends - President Obama and the Democratic party - who have lost their way. We are hopeful that via this campaign, our friends will keep their promises.

So please sign the Petition and take a Pledge to no longer donate to the DNC, Organizing for America, or the Obama campaign until the President and the Democratic party keep their promises to the gay community, our families, and our friends.


http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/6006/t/5410/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=727


http://gay.americablog.com/2009/11/dont-ask-dont-give.html


I agree. Please don't bury this in the GLBT forum, this is important.

[vegiegals]

1. so do I. And a big REC.

[global1]

2. Agreed - But Not Only On the Gay Issue - I'm Including......

Health Care and Banking/Financial Regulation. Until I see some stones out of the Dems - my wallet is shut.

[zipplewrath]

3. Mines been shut

I've changed my pattern to making direct contributions to individual candidates. Spread some around during the whole "support the public option" effort. I've been sending money to Sestak.

[TheWraith]

6. Yes, that's the way!

Convince Dems to cater to the left, by denying our support they haven't instantly accomplished issues they're working on! After all, they'll never decide we're fickle and impossible to please. Brilliant, Holmes! :sarcasm:

[mitchtv]

10. you;d rather convince them

that they can shit on us and get away with it, I suppose. The time is NOW, and the sooner Dems realize that, the better off we all will be

[Mari333]

4. KnR

[rhett o rick]

5. I already stopped donating to those organizations. I donate to Progressive Democrats of America. nt

[jaxx]

7. No way.

I'm all for getting all those things done, but I'm not cutting off the nose to spite the face in demanding it all or nothing. That old thing about with friends like those......

[Starry Messenger]

8. k & r

[mitchtv]

9. I took that pledge a while ago

no more GayTM

[Unvanguard]

11. Sorry, I find Andrew Tobias and Barney Frank more credible than these people.

Attacking Obama will accomplish diddly-squat. Lobbying Congress--particularly conservative Democrats and socially moderate Republicans--will accomplish a bit more. And on some issues, like a DOMA repeal, we are just going to have to wait, because they aren't going to happen any time soon. (This is not a judgment of importance; it is just a judgment of reality.)

As a general matter, I find it terrifying that anybody wants to weaken the Democrats now (on this or any other issue), after seeing how destructive the Republicans were when they had power, and how obstructionist they are even in the minority. I'm not going to stop donating, I'm not going to stop campaigning, and I'm not going to stop voting--not unless there comes a point where there is genuinely "a dime's worth of difference", and we are light-years from that.

[FreeState]

12. How does giving only locally to pro-human rights candidates weaken the party? n/t

[Unvanguard]

13. Because we probably need anti-human rights candidates to maintain control

and certainly to have anything approaching a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.

If you think the freedom to marry is a human right--and a good case could be made for that--then most of the American public is "anti-human rights" too, including majorities in blue-leaning states like California and Maine. Not much we can do about that, except wait as sanity and basic human decency slowly creep into more people's minds.

Edit: It's the marginal effect, really. Plenty of people even without this boycott (or whatever they want to call it) end up mainly donating to pro-equality candidates anyway. But insofar as it has an effect, insofar as it gets people to stop supporting some Democrats, it weakens the Democratic Party. (Even if the money is just moved one-to-one to pro-equality Democrats, that remains true, if only because those candidates are likely to be more politically secure.)