Thing aren’t looking good for the DNC. Judge Jeanette Clark this week rejected the party organ’s plea for a summary judgment in Donald Hitchcock’s discrimination lawsuit.
Hitchcock, you’ll remember, filed the suit after the DNC sacked him as their gay outreach officer. The politico alleges that Chairman Howard Dean and company were retaliating against him and his boyfriend, Paul Yandura, who wrote a very public letter blasting the DNC’s gay politics and for using gays as an ATM. The DNC denies these claims and hoped Clark would put the issue to bed. But, alas, she will not.
And what’s more, Clark’s taking a hard look at Dean and DNC treasurer Andy Tobias, both of whom have been accused of making defamatory statements about Hitchcock.
When asked about Hitchcock in September of 2006, Dean remarked to In Magazine, “I’m not going to comment on anybody’s firing except to say that it had nothing to do with retribution or anything like that. It was simply a job performance matter.”
In May of that same year, Tobias allegedly – and anonymously – told the Washington Blade that Hitchcock was not “fit for the job” and had been considering the move for months. Then, in February of 2007, the treasurer sent a letter to Americablog in which he, according to some people, intimated that Hitchcock hadn’t done enough to raise money for the party. Insiders tell us that both men swore under oath that they had never seen Hitchcock’s personnel records.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Hitchcock and the DNC will hold mediations on July 31st.
Paul
Howard Dean has to be the BIGGEST asshole walking on the face of this earth. HE is the reason I left the Democratic party – he is an embarassment to himself, the party, and more importantly the DNC. He has done collosal damage during his tenure and the best thing the DNC could do is send is sorry, pathetic, sexist ass back to Vermont to live with his dyke wife.
rocketboy
Citizen Crain writer Kevin hits the nail on the head with his latest posting.
http://citizenchris.typepad.com/citizenchris/2008/07/another-blow-to.html
“All that Dean and company had to do was admit they broke the law in firing Donald, and make restitution, and I’m willing to bet this whole thing would have gone away and Donald would have gone right back to the front lines. Instead, they have gone to ground in all their petty arrogance at the DNC and tried every kind of underhanded means to make Donald crawl away in fear. That has turned this case into a cause, and has allowed for the airing of a great deal of damaging correspondence and behind-the-scenes beliefs among DNC staff that show a sort of contempt for the gay community as little more than a cash machine for more important political fights, one that should best be docile and adoring and keep the checks coming.
It’s sad because, in reality, the DNC could really live up to the ideals that made Donald and Paul so fervently committed in the first place. The Democratic Party could actually win over people like me. They could get waves of support and dedication — as could the Human Rights Campaign and other pseudo-party branch organizations in the gay community — from a lot of now-very-disaffected gay people if they really did show the level of commitment and support and guts that they blather on about promising to have. But time after time, like in this case, they show themselves to be narrow-minded, petty, arrogant jerks who will throw you under the bus at the first sign of problems (or dissent) and then expect you to stand up and support them still, or else. (And no, guys, simply comparing them to the other party isn’t an answer.) The Democratic Party’s passive-aggressive relationship with many constituencies isn’t a new story, but it seems to be one which teaches its leaders no lessons at all episode after episode, chapter after chapter.
The Republican Party under Karl Rove became just as poisoned a well, and has the chance to cast off its detritus from that stewardship in this election. If it doesn’t, it will be defeated. But if any gay Democrat thinks that brushing Donald and Paul under the rug is somehow going to be good for gay rights has no right to call anyone else an Uncle Tom from inside their glass houses. Gays who would abet the DNC in illegally firing a gay person and then call on all gays to support their party at any cost are, I would argue, far more self-loathing than any gay Republican.”
Richard
I do not see how it is in Howard Deans’s or the Democratic Party’s best interest to continue to piss off the gays and let this little blow up fester any longer. Howard Dean needs to immedaitely eat crow, acknowledge he made a stupid mistake firing Donald Hitchcock, and aplogise to the gay community. Then he needs to quickly settle up, and move on. This is a sideshow and Howard Dean needs to focus on his job of ensuring Democrats win big this fall.
Charley
DNC should make a financial settlement before the election. Have you seen Jason Furman on Kudlow CNBC, Senator Barack Obama’s economic policy director? What a prissy queen. Is there an outing just around the corner?
Brian Miller
Interesting to see how the Democrats who were most loudly condemning and assailing Hitchcock and his partner throughout this entire affair are now pushing for a quick settlement. That’s the closest thing to an admission of *total guilt* that I can think of.
Hopefully, Hitchcock will continue his campaign and LGBT voters will get a good, long glimpse at the rotten and homophobic heart of the Democratic National Committee.
Jose Arribas
And the alternative to Dean and Tobias and the DNC is what? Log Cabin? Fuck that.
rocketboy
I think the alternative to Tobias and Dean, is better people. Get rid of the fucking liars, and get people who will actually do something for the LGBT community, not just take their money and make promise after promise.
MeHere
Did the DNC do something wrong? Probably. Should we make an issue of this right before an uncertain election? Absolutely not.
Some people seem to equate political success with how loudly they can make the candidate or the DNC shout about their issues in the primary. Conversely, they assume that if DNC doesn’t proclaim enough support for gay marriage, or transgender rights, or anti-discrimination, that the party has abandoned or disrespected them.
But political work gets done after the election, not before. Once you’re in, you can repeal DADT, stop the kind of discrimination that led to gay motivated firings at Justice, push for marriage, and so on.
Until then, DNC has to appeal to the broadest coalition possible, which includes a certain number of close minded people, up to and including, it seems, members of DNC staff.
Anti-Deaniacs are cutting off their nose to spite their face. Go after the DNC after the election, when the consequence of gutting the party committee is a few articles in the Post instead of another four years of social conservative rule.
Remember that DNC doesn’t set the agenda for the next administration. Obama isn’t going to be calling up Dean, or anyone in that office for advice on gay issues once he’s elected. So, attacking DNC staff based on their policy commitments makes no sense. Just work to get good people in government after November.
Konrad
“[Tobias said] Hitchcock was not ‘fit for the job’…Then, in February of 2007, the treasurer sent a letter to Americablog in which he, according to some people, intimated that Hitchcock hadn’t done enough to raise money for the party.”
WOW!! That’s defamation! Can you beleive any person could be so cruel to an employee? How can the courts allow that? If this is allowed to stand, any boss would be allowed to make a negative comment about an employee’s performance.
Thank God gays are never known to make such demfamatory and catty remarks about other people!
Brian Miller
And the alternative to Dean and Tobias and the DNC is what? Log Cabin? Fuck that.
You need to think more creatively.
Gay people who insist that the Demopublicans and the Republicrats are the only two options remind me of guys who insist they’re only “tops” or “bottoms.” Boring, uncreative and ultimately, unfulfilling!
Brian Miller
WOW!! That’s defamation! Can you beleive any person could be so cruel to an employee? How can the courts allow that?
If your employer makes negative comments about your performance, deliberately designed to injure your career, that are in contest with the facts, it is indeed a tort — actionable in civil court.
This principle is upheld so consistently by courts that most employers will not provide any feedback about an employee’s performance other than his date of employment and his title.
If you slam a colleague or subordinate in public, especially if the “assessment” is of dubious veracity (as appears to be the case in this situation), you will be personally liable for actual damages plus punitive damages.
As the DNC and the individuals named are likely to learn, quite quickly.
Konrad
“If you slam a colleague or subordinate in public, especially if the “assessment†is of dubious veracity (as appears to be the case in this situation), you will be personally liable for actual damages plus punitive damages.”
Bullshit. There is no law saying you can’t slam another person’s work performance. People do it every day. And if the assessment is “dubious” or a matter of opinion, it is absolutely legal.
Yes if it is “deliberately designed to injure your career,[and] that are in contest with the facts” there is a case. First it has to be a statement which can be proved as factually wrong. Not a matter of opinion, not a matter of judgment, but factually untrue. To say that Andy Tobias committed an illegally defamatory act by expressing the opinion that “Hitchcock hadn’t done enough to raise money for the party” is bullshit. Maybe saying that hurts the feelings of a whinny, pampered, spoiled child, but that’s not a crime. And saying he “is not fit for the job.” Sorry, baby-boy. People have the right to have such an opinion.
We should all be lucky Hitchcock is not an artist. Some potential purchaser would say “I don’t care for Donald’s painting. It doesn’t fit in with my home decor.” LAWSUIT. DEFAMATORY. SUE. SUE. SUE.