A group of prominent gay-rights bloggers, activists, and fundraisers, led by AMERICAblogGAY, is launching a boycott on contributions to the Democratic National Committee and Obama’s campaign apparatus:
We are asking voters to pledge to withhold contributions to the Democratic National Committee, Organizing for America, and the Obama campaign until the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) is passed, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT) is repealed, and the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is repealed -– all of which President Obama repeatedly promised to do if elected….
Democrats should not have promised to support gay civil rights rights in exchange for our votes if they never intended to keep the promise. If we’re not controversial during the campaign, when politicians are happy to accept our votes and our money, we cannot accept being labeled controversial after our candidates win. We kept our part of the bargain, we voted for Barack Obama and a Democratic Congress. It’s entirely reasonable for us to ask our elected officials to keep their part of the bargain too.
I doubt that this boycott will have any more success than the ill-advised boycott of Mormons by gay rights activists in response to the passage of California Prop. 8. But I understand their anger at the Obama administration.
It’s an anger so many people feel over broken promises, false promises, double-talk, sales puffery masquerading as deep concern, and smoke and mirrors packaged as hope and change. And I’m referring to Obama supporters, such as the women’s movement, who were part of Obama’s core constituency but have been thrown under the bus in order for Obama to make history.
Now I hope you all realize what those of us on the right have known all along: It’s all about him.
UPDATE: Did Dems Already Dodge Gay Activist Boycott?
——————————————–
Related Posts:
A Harvard Trial Lawyer for McCain
Anti-Mormonism Again In Gay Marriage Debate
Day Without A Gay — A Bad Idea Ends Badly
It’s Time To Speak Out Against The “Mormon Boycott”
Follow me on Twitter and Facebook
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
I wonder if the left will call these gay activists who have the nerve to protest Obama's policies "teabaggers"?
I have no connection with the bloggers referred to above, but I am in agreement with their agenda, at least as described in your post.
As we all know, many people today oppose the viewpoints of others merely on ideological grounds. That is at the root of the inability of both progressives and conservatives to entertain the possibility that some commonly held position (on their side) is an unassailable article of truth.
So it is with the gay agenda. A lot of people oppose it on principle. They are not homosexual after all. Or, if they are, they certainly don’t want anyone to think they – or a sister or brother or friend or relative – are ‘that way.’ In part, the anti-gays rely upon their religious faith and the Word of God as written in the Bible or Quran as justification for their bigotry.
So, three cheers for the hard core conservatives and the religious right for their odd defense against social justice. However, as any observer of the recent election can discern, it will take the votes of independents to win national elections – and independents are not, by and large, anti-gay.
Looking at the issues this post has indicated are high among gay priorities, none really merit opposition by freedom loving Americans, independents or Libertarians. Who for instance cares whether another law is passed to specifically deny workplace discrimination against gay people? The idea that it’s not needed or redundant is a poor argument. Who cares whether this addition set of protections is put in place? Unless, of course, it’s a matter of principle to ‘oppose gay rights’ as a part of the progressive agenda.
As a former Marine enlisted man and US Army infantry officer, I have in the past strongly opposed the idea of gays openly serving in the US military. But, DADT has been in place for a long, long time now. There are now (and always have been) many, many gays serving in the military. Yet, our artillery still hits its targets, our advanced aircraft haven’t fallen from the sky and the bad guys are still being crushed. The idea that gays cannot serve openly is as outdated NOW as the idea the woman cannot serve in combat held by many on the left some years ago. Finally, conservatives who are not religious fanatics might worry that the gay activist population of San Francisco is suddenly going to don camouflage and come dancing down the streets of Baghdad. That is, well, stupid. When bullets are flying only heroes stand to post: men and woman; gay and straight. And, that’s how it always has been since Caesar’s armies roamed the Mediterranean.
And, lastly DOMA. What a joke. With heterosexual divorce rates such as they are, marriage needs a whole makeover all right, but not by government edict. Marriage is both a civil act and a religious act. I was married to my former wife in a civil ceremony. The Catholic Church in all its wisdom and glory simply refused to recognize our civil bond since we never took our marriage vows before a priest. Consequently, my wife (divorced) was not allowed to receive communion, but I was (never divorced). That’s fair. Let the churches and temples and mosques decide who in their congregation can be ‘married’ and who cannot. Let the states decide who can marry civilly or what might constitute a domestic partnership. That’s fair too.
As valuable as independents are to Republicans in 2010, it might behoove those on the retro right to ease up on their relentless crusade against gays and for that matter, Hispanics and others they have so foolishly in the past treated with disgust and considered criminals. It just isn’t so. And, it makes conservatives ugly.
So, here is your opportunity, conservatives. Obama is once again showing his behind. Instead of doing the same, it’s time to reflect on what’s really important. It’s time to reach out your hand.
Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Florida), the Democrats' chief deputy whip in the House, said yesterday that she and other pro-abortion lawmakers would work to strip the Stupak amendment included in the House health bill that bars federal funding of abortions under the public health insurance option. (See earlier article)
Wasserman Schultz told MSNBC, "I am confident that when it comes back from the conference committee that the language won't be there."
Link
Hey, anybody who was dumb enough to vote for Obama deserves what he and she gets. Gay people? Well, too bad for you but not half as bad as Jews voting for Obama. I mean, for a culture so highly regarded for savvy and intelligence, how could 98% of Jews in the US vote for a guy who made it a campaign promise to meet the chief terrorist brewing up a nuclear holocaust against Israel but now insists on pre-conditions for an informal meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu?
Wake up my Jewish brothers and sisters. It was exactly this sort of psychotic denial of reality that allowed the Holocaust to happen. A vote for Obama is a vote to destroy Israel. A dollar given to Obama is a dollar given to terrorism against Israel (quite literally given Obama's grants to Palestinian terror organizations).
What is the homo-mafia going to do…vote Republican?
you'd never know it from listening to him or watching him but Obama isn't actually campaigning any more….
I NEED TO TESTIFY RIGHT NAO!
I’m gay, and I LOATHE JOHN ARAVOSIS (of Americablog, I guess which is now AmericablogGAY or w/e) WITH EVERY FIBER OF MY BEING! I used to dig his blog back in the day, but now he can STFU and go have his little pity party of one (or 3, I guess).
He was a complete O-Bot all through 2008. He banned SEVERAL of his mostly gay commenters from his blog for calling out Obama’s BS record on gay rights — or any Hillary supporting commenter for that matter.
He wrote flippantly about Hillary Clinton “Is Laura Bush qualified to be President?” insinuating Hillary was just tea parties and doilies.
Sarah Palin? “Is my Mom qualified to be Vice President?” and I remember she and McCain went to Louisiana or something for Hurricane relief and he LITERALLY blogged “Are these earrings appropriate to wear to the scene of a national disaster?” because Palin was wearing HOOPS.
He is a consummate insane misogynist, and he can own the bullsh*t he bought in Team Obama along with the other Leftist Blogger Boyz (Markos Moulitsas, for starters).
NO SYMPATHY. They buy into the identity politics garbage the left holds out like a carrot, they deserve to get burned. Aravosis is a tool.
SO MUCH SEETHING BITTER HATRED. Ugh!
@2470144: first, thanks for your service, sir.
secondly, i want to thank you for the most thoughtful and reasonable post i've read regarding legal equality for gay citizens. 'amanda' asks "what are they gonna do, vote republican?" .. well, if the GOP had more folks like you, rather than the torch and pitchfork crowd that has taken over the party, loyal gay voters (who are not all crazed lefties by any means)would be attracted to the party. the log cabin group has been trying to work within the GOP for years but they have been rebuffed at every turn. what is the point of that? can we move beyond ancient bigotries?whatever became of the 'traditional conservative values' like smaller government, lower taxes, free enterprise, and individual liberty ? many people, gay or straight, of whatever race, can support those values.
Amanda,
Why, yes, yes, we will.
I am a former liberal and lifelong Democrat who became a fiscal conservative during the fall of the 2008 presidential campaign. I knew Obama would betray gays, women and Jews as soon as I knew about his 20-year association with Rev. Wright. I never listened to him for more than a few minutes because I can't stand platitudes and have no idea why anyone thinks he is eloquent. I just watched what Obama did. After the election I changed my registration to Republican. In January I started my blog, A Conservative Lesbian, which Prof. Jacobson kindly lists in his blogroll.
Expect more lesbians and gays like me to be leaving the Democrats and supporting fiscal conservatism and liberty. We are working for equality and won't serve candidates or parties that insist we must be second-class citizens. But fiscal conservatism and liberty make the tent large enough for us to enter, and, I promise, we are going to make the place fabulous!
Also: thank you to @2470144 and Novaya Havoc.
The Democrats are cannabalising themselves again. If I were gay i'd leave the party and go libertarian.
> Democrats should not have promised to support gay civil rights rights in exchange for our votes if they never intended to keep the promise.
BWAAAAhahahahhahahhahaaaaaa….!!!
Idiot, they've been doing that to every one of their victimhood groups for a century. From their power base in the South, supporting "oppressed white ex-slaveholders" to modern times, they've been playing every damnfool idiot in the nation telling them how they "feel" for them.
Bullworth said it best:
Angry black woman: Are you sayin' the Democratic Party don't care about the African-American community?
Bullworth: Isn't that OBVIOUS? You got half your kids are out of work and the other half are in jail. Do you see ANY Democrat doing anything about it? Certainly not me! So what're you gonna do, vote Republican? Come on! Come on, you're not gonna vote Republican! Let's call a spade a spade!
[Loud, angry booing]
Bullworth: I mean – come on! You can have a Billion Man March! If you don't put down that malt liquor and chicken wings, and get behind someone other than a running back who stabs his wife, you're NEVER gonna get rid of somebody like me!