Michael Hamar

Why We DO Need to Close the "gAyTM"

Filed By Michael Hamar | July 12, 2010 8:30 AM | comments

Filed in: Politics, Politics
Tags: Barack Obama, broken campaign promises, Congressional Democrats, DADT repeal, ENDA, Glenn Nye, Pam Spaulding

Joe Mirabella had posts on Pam's House Blend and here at The Bilerico Project entitled "Don't Close the "gAyTM" that garnered high volumes of comments (65 comments on Bilerico and 197 comments on Pam's blog). Advocate cover kiss my ass.jpg

Joe's argument - after reviewing all of the betrayals and non-actions of Obama and Congressional Democrats to date - boils down to the following:

$300 Million [in far right organization funding] can do incredible damage to not only the Democratic Party, but to the LGBT community. The Republican Party remains viscerally opposed to equal rights for LGBTs. If you think sitting on your wallet is helpful to our community, you are simply wrong.

Why Joe's argument is off the mark, after the jump.

I realize not every Democrat is perfect and some are downright wrong on our issues. This is why I urge the DNC to create an LGBT fund. Allow us to contribute to the DNC while knowing our money won't support candidates who do not support us.

With all due respect to Joe, he's singing EXACTLY the song the cynical, disingenuous Democrats - including our faux "fierce advocate" in the White House - want him to sing.

There will ALWAYS be an excuse why they want us to keep ponying up money and votes for them even as they do nothing but give us false promises of future progress in return. Except the return never happens and the date for promised results just moves on further and further out in the future. As noted in prior posts, one form of insanity is continuing to do the same thing time and time again and expecting different results to somehow miraculously to occur.

It's not going to happen.

As long as the Democrats know that they can throw us repeatedly under the bus yet can count on us to show up with money and votes like Pavlov's dog, why is there any need for them do anything different? They get exactly what they want without doing anything except holding up the same old GOP boogie man. They think we're idiots - and if we keep doing the same thing no matter how bad the betrayals, they are right, we will be proving ourselves to be idiots. The homophobic and slanted DADT survey - which I personally suspect our "fierce advocate" at the White House knew about - is but the latest glaring evidence of the contempt with which the Democrats believe they can view us and still have us mindlessly hand over money and show up on election day.

Pam Spaulding's analysis is correct in my view: turn off the gAyTM except for candidates that have actually done what they promised in terms on actual, concrete votes.

In keeping with this approach, I am supporting Virginia 2nd District Congressman Glenn Nye for re-election because he has delivered: He voted for Hate Crimes, he a co-sponsor of ENDA and he voted for DADT repeal. As for the rest of the Democrats and the DNC, Pam's thoughts are spot on:

The reality-based conclusion in the coffeehouse is that we've had it with the hopey-changey head fakes and fear-based approaches to extracting cash out of the gAyTM. It's over.

We're keeping the gAyTM CLOSED, only donating to pols and organizations that are pro-equality and have been effective in advocacy. I see nothing wrong with this. I am not, however, an advocate of sitting out the midterms. If you have pro-equality candidates on the ballot, they deserve and need your vote.

[R]eality-based LGBTs . . are tired of being played. We're tired of being told by Beltway advocates (who are in a political bubble) that to disagree with this White House's LGBT "strategy" (if you can call it that) is "politically unsophisticated," impatient or that it's merely tantrum throwing. Say whatever you wish about our position. The GAyTM is still closed.

Recent Entries Filed under Politics:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.

I agree. I think we can't turn off the GayTM completely. Then there is no reason for anyone to do anything for us, but we can re-direct those funds directly to candidates who are genuinely representing us.

This provides them much needed support, and continues to show that we are a constituency that needs to be considered.

From my perspective all this talk about money misses the point. Isn't the purpose of money in elections simply to get out the vote for one candidate or another? Is money the only way to do that? Hardly.

The problem I see with the Democrats in Congress is the leadership. If we want to make a very forceful statement we should get selective. Depose just a few leaders and be very open about it. Use the net. Strongly support most Democrats to avoid a Republican takeover but openly target a few for defeat. Sure money is part of the equation but it should not be the entire focus. If a united effort was focused on removing just 3 obstructionists Democrat leaders from the house it would be a game changer. And I'll bet we can marshal the votes to rattle their cozy cage. Which 3 would you pick?


I agree with your concept. The point that needs to be made is that there are negative consequences for the Democrats if the "business as usual" continues in terms of playing games with LGBT voters. I'll let you know who my three choices to target would be in another comment, but right now Senator Jim Webb is probably one of them.

I would add Ben Nelson to the list.

"one form of insanity is continuing to do the same thing time and time again and expecting different results to somehow miraculously to occur."

You have described "politics."

We won't win until we change minds. At that point, we would "own" the politicians. Yet, we spend less than 2% of all LGBT Community resources on changing minds. WE are the solution, not politics.

The key is to pick only full-equality candidates to support. I don't mind giving them cash directly, but my days of giving to the DNC are over. I'm tired of them supporting Blue Dog Democrats over progressives.

I completely agree: no money until we get full equality.

I've gotten a number of "surveys" about important issues, which is just a ruse to get people to contribute when finished with the survey.

More times than not, the DEMOCRATIC survey omits ANY gay rights concerns. And many of these surveys are mailed to me in San Francisco. If the Dems won't mention gay rights to citizens of SF then WTF!

I reply to every email from the Democratic party as follows:
When ENDA is passed, when DOMA and DADT are repealed, that is when you get my money.

When I get a survey in the mail, I reply the same way and I make sure that I DO NOT use my own stamp as they usually request.

The time to give and get nothing is over. I never believed that christian crap about turning the cheek. Turning the cheek just gets you slapped again.