Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  rsvpeeved

How Come Barack Obama Didn’t Invite Joe Solmonese to the White House This Pride Season?

Among the invited guests at Tuesday’s White House LGBT reception: Prom queen Constance McMillen and the executive directors of state activist organizations like Equality North Carolina and Equality Florida. Not on the guest list: the Human Rights Campaign’s Joe Solmonese or GetEQUAL’s Robin McGehee, though you can imagine why the presence of the latter activist was not requested. But what’s it say that Obama lapdog Solmonese isn’t going?

Not a whole lot.

You can read into any number of ways:

• The White House (i.e. Jim Messina) simply want to focus this year on the regional activists working to win rights state-by-state, giving “the little guys” their due without letting Solmonese overshadow them.

• Obama’s camp is purposefully spending Pride Month distancing itself from the Gay Inc. insiders it’s been accused of conspiring with in the past.

• Solmonese let the White House know ahead of time that, rather than keep his attention focused on of-the-minute domestic issues like repealing DADT, he’s got another international getaway planned and they shouldn’t bother wasting paper and stamps on inviting him.

Since I didn’t get an invite, my only question is whether Obama’s team invited Chad Griffin or anyone from the American Foundation for Equal Rights, which funded the Olson-Boies Prop 8 suit, to take part. That, or whether the Log Cabin Republicans — which is suing the federal government over DADT — will pull a Michaele Salahi and crash the event uninvited.

By:           Ryan Tedder
On:           Jun 21, 2010
Tagged: , , , , , , , , ,

  • 9 Comments
    • Cam
      Cam

      He wasn’t invited because he didn’t do the job he was supposed to do….i.e. he and Barney Frank were supposed to keep the gay community quiet and off Obama’s back, and give cover for the govt. not pushing ahead on any gay rights initiatives. He failed so he is off the party invite list.

      Jun 21, 2010 at 1:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lanjier
      Lanjier

      He didn’t get an invite because he probably has an administration political appointment waiting. It pays to be an Obama lackey.

      Jun 21, 2010 at 2:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Andrew
      Andrew

      Go ahead and continue bashing Obama. I’m sure you’ll all have the same thoughts when we not only have a Republican President who wouldn’t day declare an entire month in honor of a major LGBT historical event, — but would sooner push for the reinstatement of sodomy laws and bringing the force of the federal government against state won victories.

      How soon people forget the past…

      Jun 21, 2010 at 2:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lanjier
      Lanjier

      It is not anything to do with memory, it is about accountability. The Democrats gave us DADT and DOMA, and when they re-took the government, they kept them on the books.

      Jun 21, 2010 at 2:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brutus
      Brutus

      The Democrats gave us DADT, and when they did it was seen as a step forward (you could no longer be discharged for the mere status of homosexuality, but only for engaging in acts).

      The Republicans gave us DOMA.

      Jun 21, 2010 at 3:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lanjier
      Lanjier

      DADT permits discharges for sexual orientation alone. – Wiki

      Clinton signed DOMA into law, with the votes of almost all Democrats in both houses. – Wiki

      Jun 21, 2010 at 4:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
      Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com

      @Brutus:

      Sorry, while the “DADT” version of the ban was milder in some ways, e.g., the ban on asking if a potential recruit or one already serving is gay [often violated] and discouraging witch hunts [still violated], it absolutely did NOT, no matter how many times the professional liars for the Pentagon say it, stop discharges for simply “being gay.”

      Just like the policy ban before it, if one admits to or is determined to “be” gay the military ASSUMES that he/she has a “propensity” to engage in homosexual conduct.

      “The Service member shall be advised of this presumption and given the opportunity to rebut the presumption by presenting evidence demonstrating that he or she is not a person who engages in, attempts to engage in, has a propensity to engage in, or intends to engage in homosexual acts.” – Department of Defense INSTRUCTION NUMBER 1332.14, SUBJECT: Enlisted Administrative Separations, ENCLOSURE 3, REASONS FOR SEPARATION.

      But, of course, how does one prove that he/she will NOT do something in the future?

      While some, both before and after DADT, have escaped discharge by getting married to someone of the opposite gender, and a microscopic number by the “Queen for a Day” ["Boy, was I drunk last night."] defense, the vast majority are discharged once there is the knowledge/belief that the individual simply “is” gay.

      And due to the fact that Obama tore up and threw away the five-year old proposed “Military Readiness Enhancement Act” which would have unequivocally required an end to all discharges in six months, even IF DADT is “repealed,” there is NOTHING in the amendment to prevent the Pentagon from going back to its own pre-DADT ban that discharged well-over 100,000 gays.

      “Pelosi said the House weakened its repeal language to mollify the White House. … Military leaders refused to accept language that would bar discrimination, so the clause was dropped.” – Ryan Grim, The Huffington Post, June 3, 2010.

      [img]http://02b4964.netsolhost.com/images/509_1OBAMA-WHOM-DID-WE-ELECT.jpg[/img]

      Jun 21, 2010 at 4:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • swarm
      swarm

      “• Obama’s camp is purposefully spending Pride Month distancing itself from the [name any group here] insiders it’s been accused of conspiring with in the past.”

      HOW is this different than Obama’s proven pre and post election under the bus behaviors?

      Oh wait. We don’t have any journalists left to actually ASK questions or research anything. Today’s journalism is reduced to fanboying Obama mind reading (“he’s secretly in favor of ss marriage”)

      Jun 21, 2010 at 8:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DEREK WASHINGTON
      DEREK WASHINGTON

      You guys are lame.

      If he had invited Loser Joe, you would have bitched.

      He didn’t, so, you bitch.

      You just bitch.

      Bitches.

      Jun 23, 2010 at 3:15 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Queerty now requires you to log in to comment

    Please log in to add your comment.

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.