With only six primaries left – and Barack Obama‘s resounding lead over rival Hillary Clinton – many people have basically declared the delegate selection over. That, however, would be premature.
While the majority of the states and overseas regions’ delegate numbers have been determined, most of them must still decide which individuals will head to Denver this August. have ruled which candidate gets how many delegates, most of them still must decide who will head to Denver this August. And, like so many things in this election, there’s loads of drama surrounding the process. Infighting, allegations, personal homophobia and potentially impotent DNC “gay delegate goals” may derail the whole process.
Editor Andrew Belonsky offers part one of an extensive two-part analysis, after the jump…
The Democratic party proved themselves relatively progressive last year when they passed the Shay Amendment. That measure, put forth by gay DNC member Garry Shays, originally requested that the party add gays and disabled voters to the party’s affirmative action guidelines, which would have been a tremendously powerful move.
Unfortunately, many leaders – particularly superdelegate Donna Brazile – scoffed at the idea and worried that such a push would take away seats from other constituencies, like Asians or African-Americans.
Rather than amending the affirmative action policies, Shay’s proposal birthed the aforementioned “gay goals:” lavender-tinged markers set by each state.
Some of you may be wondering why it matters to have queers in Denver. Well, aside from proving the Democratic parties inclusive nature, delegate participating guarantees gays a stake in the party’s platform, helps form the connections integral to national politics and, in some cases, inspires people to run for office.
That said, it should come as no surprise that the National Stonewall Democrats are using all their power – and over $60,000, at least $10,000 of which came from the DNC – to push the gay goals. To this end, the non-profit established Pride In The Party, headed by longtime Democratic activist Rick Boylan. Boylan and his peers have been having “productive” discussions with party leaders across the country, including in Washington DC, to ensure the Shay Amendment doesn’t fizzle.
Now that these states are finally selecting their individual delegates, however, there’s trouble brewing beneath the surface and we gays may find ourselves this election’s spoilers.
The trouble first crossed my desk when an anonymous source sent me a letter penned by Clinton-backing Jon Winkleman, a civil rights attorney who claims Obama locals in Louisiana were making a concerted effort to push potential gay delegate out of the process. Louisiana set its gay goal at five.
In addition to providing insight into campaign infighting, Winkleman also provides easily digestible background on the difference between regular delegates and “at-large” delegates, who help make up the difference for any underrepresented group. I’ve done editing for chronological reasons:
This year the Louisiana Democratic Party elected it first group of openly LGBT people to serve on the state committee and form a small but still groundbreaking LGBT caucus. Wonderful. [This weekend] the Louisiana state party [selected] at-large delegates for the convention. Traditionally if the numerical diversity goals aren’t met when delegates are elected in the state primary or caucus, the at-large delegates will make up for the difference.
As Obama had a strong win in Louisiana, his campaign gets to select most of the at large delegates. His campaign SHOULD be selecting three-to-four LGBT delegates from their total at large delegates. There are four LGBT running for at large to be pledged to Obama. However each campaign has the right to strike any name off the ballot they choose. Friends of mine in Louisiana have been told by Obama people in Louisiana that all of the LGBT delegates will be struck from the list. They verbally said such.
Obama supporters actively pushing against gay delegates? That definitely qualifies as a wildly distressing allegation, and one that had me wondering if Winkleman’s simply spouting partisan politics.
In an effort to find the truth, I contacted Eric Stern, a former John Edwards supporter who signed up with Barack Obama’s campaign following Edwards’ exit from the race. Not surprisingly, Stern flat out denied Winkleman’s words, calling them “unsubstantiated” and “inaccurate.” He later sent an email in which he promised the national campaign definitely backed gay delegates and was “working diligently” to ensure the states meet their mythical goals.
Stern went on to explain what went down in Louisiana, including a worrisome bit about that state’s central Democratic leadership:
Four openly gay candidates ran for delegate in Louisiana. Three of the candidates were pledged to Clinton; one was pledged to Obama. Only one of the openly gay candidates was elected (Stephen Handwerk–a Clinton pledged delegate). Senator Obama sent a letter of enthusiastic support on behalf of Derrin Bergeron–the openly gay Obama delegate candidate. The Louisiana Democratic Party demonstrated some resistance to the LGBT affirmative action goals set forward and approved by the DNC.
“Resistance?” Obviously my ears perked up and I soon found myself on the line with Julie Vezinoti, press spokesperson for the Louisiana Democratic Party.
Ms. Vezinoti and I first discussed that alarming adjective, “resistance,” and the politico assured me that no one, to her knowledge, had tried to strike gays from the delegate selection process, “No, that isn’t true at all… We’re all really positive about getting as many people involved as possible.”
It’s at this point I should offer more extensive explanation on how the delegate selection goes down. Basically, anyone can run to be a delegate – you simply put your name on the party ballot, campaign as if running for office and let the votes stream – or trickle – in. The candidates do, however, have power over whether hopefuls move forward. A source close to the National Stonewall Democrats, who preferred not be named, explains:
The delegate selection process is really a top down thing that the national campaigns have an enormous amount of power over. On both sides, the campaigns are striking down potential delegates who they don’t feel are 100% loyal, people who they think are activists with agendas on the campaign or simply, just to make sure that their loyal people get elected. Or, in the case of the at-large delegates, to make sure they meet up with the diversity goals they fell short.
These at-large delegates are doled out in direct proportion to the candidate’s primary performance. As Winkleman’s letter explained, Obama led in Louisiana, so he received more at-large delegate slots. None of those have been filled with gay folk. Or, at least, no openly gay folk.
Boylan helped shed some light on why some states, such as Louisiana, have been having trouble meeting their mark. “There are so many factors in reaching goals,” he explained. “We have other categories in compiling what the Democratic party looks like in states, like a big puzzle. Sometimes it works out, and sometimes it doesn’t.”
Categories, or constituencies, definitely complicate the process, but that’s only part of the problem. Or, rather, problems…
Read the rest of my discoveries – and the Democrats’ challenge – tomorrow. In the meantime, why don’t you enjoy the DNC-provided explanation of the convoluted delegate process. It’s a PDF, so be warned!
Delegate Rules
Justin Bright
It doesn’t matter. We’ve already determined all the gays are going to defect to McCain out of anger anyway. Because you know, McCain is going to be so much better for gay rights. /sarcasm
Tom
Not all Gays will defect to McCain. I started off the campaign firmly supportive of Clinton. But her Tonya Harding baseball bat to the knees style of campaigning turned me off. I, like many others, have gravitated to Obama and he will get my vote.
Although this story is worrisome, I suspect it may have more to do with political favoritism than anti-gay bias. But it is the south, so one never knows. Regardless, the facts should be exposed, people held accountable, and any wrongs should be corrected.
24play
1) Could it be any more obvious that Winkleman himself “leaked” you the letter?
2) If the Obama campaign is blacklisting the available queer delegates in Louisiana, it’s unlikely they’re doing so because they’re a bunch of fags and dykes. Much more likely that those wannabe delegates are not solid Obama supporters (probably a bunch of sad Clinton and Edwards fanatics), and that’s why his campaign doesn’t want them at the convention. In a close fight like this, you have to value loyalty above a bunch of ridiculous diversity quotas.
3) The gay Democratic machine, including hacks like Winkleman and most of his ilk at the various Stonewall clubs, lined up early for Clinton, assuming she really was inevitable. Well, they bet on the wrong horse, and now that means a lot of them are not going to be going to Denver. Boohoo. Serves them right for choosing the safe choice instead of the progressive choice. (But then, isn’t that what party hacks always do?)
DCRocket
DNC has put gays in an awkward position, to sound like crybabies that we aren’t included in the convention. Governor Dean and the DNC dropped the ball on this one when they backed away from stronger language that is equal to affirmative action goals around African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, and Women.
Gays were put into a separate category,and now we are given the crumbs of the party. Shame. Shame. Shame.
24play
P.S. CONFIDENTIAL TO JON WINKLEMAN AND COMPANY: Whining and pulling backhanded stunts like this is not the way to curry favor with the new head of the Democratic Party. If you want a place at the table in an Obama administration, you’re going to have to earn it. Showing his team you actually can be hard working, trustworthy and loyal would probably be a good start.
DCRocket
If you think this is a fight, just wait until the LGBT’s have to fight our own party to add “gender identity” to the Democratic Party Platform in Denver.
Currently the Democratic Party platform only includes “sexual orientation” in its non-discrimination language.
If Dean and the DNC’s record over the past few years is any indicator, we are screwed. Time for the insiders to step up. Maybe we can get a commitment now from Clinton or Obama that this will not be a fight that the LGBT community has to fight in Denver, and the addition of “gender identity” is a done deal.
24play
A commitment from Clinton about taking care of GLBTs? BWAHAHAHHAHA! That’s worth even less now than it ever was.
Snoodle
On an unrelated note…it looks a bit like Hillary is heiling Hitler :p
clloki
I submitted my name as a potential (out, gay) delegate for Obama’s GA delegation and was approved by the campaign. I lost in the caucus (20 contenders for 3 available spots in my district), but not because of any gay-exclusion tactics from the campaign.
M Shane
There is less reason to trust anything that Winkleman, or anybody from the Clinton Machine has to say than what seems to be the case. Granted Donna Brazile is an incredible pain in the ass who should have been dumped long before, but I don’t see anything reliable going one now. That whole ugly black additude of wanting to grab all of the affirmative affirmation “slots” for themselves is an old sow that needs to be put down, and people like Brazile should know and be made aware of how ignorant and passe’ that position is. I feel confident that Obama himself would not support what is really a racist position or have it in his cabinet.
This is one of the reasons that Gay people despirately need an unbending platform of respect.i.e. fuck HRC.
hisurfer
Political insiders fighting over turf is hardly a “gay delegate war.”
underbear1
As an ex-Minnesota transplant living in Louisiana, I wouldn’t be suprised there wouldn’t be too many openly gay/lesbian delegates here. This state is SO back-assward, it was like transporting to Pre-Stonewall era moving here. Outside a small gay ghetto of NOLA, the state is very closeted. the influence of Baptist and Catholics keep this state in the Dark Ages.
Politics here is so corupt and conservative,(all the Democrats are pro-life and anti-gay)that I haven’t been active in politics since I moved here…why bother? If Mary Landrieu is any Democrats idea of an ideal candidate, you’d love LA.
to me she’s Lieberman in drag
Mr C
And the Gay War Delegate only affects the gays. Believe me on that.
Peter Pan
Pastor Mannning Says Obama & Wright Are Gay
Interview with Pastor Manning
Listen FREE – MP3
http://rense.gsradio.net:8080/rense/special/rense_Pastor_J_Manning_051208.mp3
Charley
Campaigns describe a delegate’s criteria as 100% loyal, this translates into how much money did he/she give to the campaign, or raise for the campaign.
Mr C
If Pastor Manning has not slept with any of them. I don’t think I’ll believe it!
NotJon
Jon Winkleman is not a civil-rights attorney. He’s a waiter.
IsThisNews
Not only is Winkleman not an attorney, but all the names are miss-spelled. Surely this is not Journalism. Besides, I find it hard to take this “news” site seriously when the lead yesterday was a Penis Chastity belt. I mean come on…
johnny morales
The blacklisting of potential gay delegates from Louisiana makes total sense if one is aware of just how ABSOLUTELY OPPOSED the Southern Black Church is to Homosexuality and Homosexual rights.
On the Homosexual issue, African Americans voted IN HIGHER percentages AGAINST gay rights in every state where their #s were significant – especially in the South.
Hello young queers, just because you like Obama, doesn’t mean he likes you, and considering he kept a strident anti-gay Southern preacher throughout a promotional tour in South Carolina does indicate something. Eventually he added a gay preacher to balance the ticket BUT ONLY AFTER strong protest by gay groups and ONLY after quite a delay. He was quite tone deaf to the gay issue, and still is.
Obama himself is NO doubt probably neutral on gay rights. It’s not important to him. It doesn’t affect him, and he is NOT going to sacrifice 1 bit of political traction supporting gay rights for one simple reason…..
That 90% majority of African Americans that have given him their support are almost as opposed to gay rights by that margin.
Their votes are FAR FAR more valuable than the gay vote to Obama.
He refused to appear in public with SF mayor Gaven Newsome (according to the Mayor)because of the straight mayors pro-gay views.
In politics we all know it’s important to know your enemies, BUT MORE IMPORTANT IS
Make sure you know what your “friends” think, While African Americans and Gay/Lesbians may share the same big Democratic tent, based on many endless surveys and studies it would be foolish to assume that African Americans are any more sympathetic to gay rights than your typical White person is – quite often they are more extreme – because they are MORE religious (hah and you thought it was about color).
For African Americans the deep feelings against gay rights is rooted in RELIGION.
Southern Black Churches are Extremely conservative.
Don’t any young queers ever wonder why being “down low” is so prevalent among African Americans in urban areas where’d you think it’d be easily accepted?
Now you know.
hisurfer
Show the numbers, Morales. A simple web search will show that African Americans support gay rights in housing and the workplace at a higher rate than white Americans, and gay marriage at a lower rate.
As for the rest of your tirade: do you actually know any black people? From this you’d think all black folk do is spend their day praising jesus and hating on the queers.
Stephen Handwerk
Hogwash!
NO LGBT Democrats were struck by the Obama camapaign in Louisiana. I told this to Andrew as he was writing this story – this was also confirmed by Julie Vezenot (communications director for the Louisiana Democratic Party). There was one Delegate Candidate running as an openly gay male for an AT LARGE seat. Try as we might, he didn’t get enough votes to be elected – but he was NOT struck.
It is one thing to debate this topic, but quite another to base accusations on false claims.
Seriously, enough of this.
CHURCHILL-Y
Johnny morales, like I said on another post about a black man using the f-word and saw that some of the posters were defending him, it doesn’t matter to the people who blindly follow Hussein Obama and it certainly doesn’t matter to gay african americans they have a double standard when it comes to bigotry in short the only form they acknowledge is racism especially when its directed at blacks. Hun you can show Hisurfer and all the above posters here all the “numbers” in the world and they’ll come up with some lame excuse for the behavior of african americans when it comes to Gays.
I’m one of those “young queers”(in my mid-twenties) who’s not fooled by Obama and I’m especially not fooled by his followers. And like me, many other young people. As time passes and more information and stories like this one comeout people especially LGBT, will come to know what an Obama campaing is really all about.
NObama!!!
Mr C
Johnny Morales……
EH Sounds like a HISPANIC that has an issue with another race of people that are church goers instead of seeing that his own people do the same bigoted rhetoric towards LGBT in the name of God?
Bottom line is this some of you Clinton bitches who keep gripping. Show me WHITE and HISPANIC churches that are mainstream religion that accept LGBT.
When you find one let me know!
You’ll be looking for the rest of life.
GET OVER RACE FAGS!
If you like it or not this is it!
OBAMA/CLINTON 08′
So if you will please Vote for McCain so he can give states rights. Like Louisiana (Jena) and Kentucky (The entire state)amongst others to obliterare your tired asses for being fags and you’ll have no protection. TISK, TISK, TISK.
DAMN punks, Fags give me gas with their subliminal rhetoric. Just damn angry because Hillary is not getting it like you thought she would.
And to think because Hillary marches in the NY Gay Parade it’s like she really loves the queens. HELL NO it’s called PANDERING and they all do it.
And by the way Ms Churchill I’m sure you do not have any Black Gay or straight friends to think you know so much about our community.
We DO NOT allow straight Black folks to address us in negative ways. And if you want to use examples.
Here’s one.
Dick Army called Barney Frank on the house floor a few years ago “Barney Fag” But you might be too young to remember that. And their both WHITE you hypocrite.
So since you think RACE isn’t an issue with some whites in this campaign.
Then read this.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/12/AR2008051203014.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2008051301359
This community needs to continue to fight for the rights of the community instead looking for whoever will be President to do it. I have said over and over again. They can’t do shit. Only the house and senate makes the call on these issues and once you ignorant queens realize that then as a community we can move forward.
But you damn NELLY queens is so up in arms about a Bi-Racial Man who might get the highest office in the country.
Some of you might as well start screaming WHITE POWER and pulling out the sheets.
But guess what girls too late for any of that!
However, don’t worry she will rock in Kentucky next week!
TRUST.
OBAMA/CLINTON 08′
Mr C
And also Johnny Morales, A question for you: Tell me in the Jesus de Cristo Iglesia they accept HOMOSEXUALITY….Not hardly!
These things are not based on RACE. They are based on Christian Principles no matter if YOU believe them or not. And that’s shared by all races.
Once again a subliminal attacks because a Bi-Racial Man has reached a pinnacle in this country. And also in New Orleans as well as the state of Louisiana the Black LGBT community is miniscule at most and no where near as big as the white LGBT community there. Who isn’t prejudice. But loves Shirley Q Liquor queen of The Bourbon. Go Figure!
So stop tripping. Please
johnny morales
HIsURFER – WHERE R UR NUMBERS? Your “stating as fact” what is your “opinion” does not make it truth.
Do U think Gay Rights is a “civil rights” issue or not. Why don’t you ask some of your friends who you say are African American?
I grew up next door to a large African American family, in a mixed neighborhood. I know all types, NOT just the ones I self-selected for tolerance of being gay.
A simple search for -“African American” “Gay Rights”- and you’ll find a plethora of articles written by AFRICAN AMERICANS talking openly and freely about the deeply rooted homophobia that is STRONGER and LESS TOLERANT than most other groups, along the lines of the Deep South White Christian groups from which they share a commopn religious heritage.
————————-
Mr C – Why do you reply if you do NOT read other people’s posts. Just how silly you look is indicated by the fact I said EXACTLY what you said. It’s a religious issue – NOT a Black issue.
African-Americans are MORE CONSERVATIVE than most any other group. That is the point BECAUSE THEY ARE FERVENTLY RELIGIOUS.
BI-RACIAL? This is nonsense – It’s a culture issue, not a color issue. African Americans have on average 21% white heritage.
So ALL African Americans are Bi-Racial.
Whether they can obviously point to a white mother or not to prove it is irrelevant.
African-Americans have their own culture IT’s A CULTURE ISSUE – if you think that’s a racist comment the only racist is you. They are quite proud of it.
There are plenty of churches that accept Homosexuality. If you don’t know that, u need to work on your ignorance.
—————————
STOP MAKING ENEMIES WHERE THERE ISN’T ONE
I am NOT opposed to Obama.
I AM OPPOSED to the deep strain of homophobia ingrained in the African Church which makes itself known through a less-tolerant attitude along the line of WHITE SOUTHERN CHRISTIAN groups within African American society.
Talking about RACE means just that TALKING ABOUT IT.
This thread reminds me of the widespread Lesbian support of the Sandinistas way back when. Boy where they upset when they realized their precious Sandinistas where so anti-gay they passed the most repressive anti-gay laws this hemisphere ever saw – thanks to the Catholic influence.
Until they did that though, one had to watch your words around a Lefty Lesbian supporter of the Sandistas unless you were willing to engage in a pitched battle against the same kind of stupidity that is fueling the replies here.
Finally if this post does not go through, just cancel my membership. I will not be a reader of a group that only allows one side of an discussion to progress.
abracadaver
I can’t believe that no one in this learned group has yet discovered and posted that the statements made in this article by Queerty about Donna Brazile are completely inaccurate.
Ms. Brazile has consistently fought for LGBT inclusion. She did not reject the Shay amendment (inclusion of LGBT people as delegates); she merely said that including them under Rule 6A of the delegate rules wasn’t appropriate, as it applies to racial/ethnic minorities who were once denied the right to vote. That is what the Shay amendment attempted to do. She and others then proposed and introduced Rule 7C, to codify a position for both LGBT people and those with disabilities. This is in addition to Rule 5.
Queerty has a reponsibility to check the facts, and they often fail abysmally. Anyone interested in the ACTUAL facts can call Brian Bond at the DNC, 203-863-8000.
Mr C
Johnny, and by the way I don’t look silly.
You said: African-Americans are MORE CONSERVATIVE than most any other group. That is the point BECAUSE THEY ARE FERVENTLY RELIGIOUS.
How in the hell do you know this? Have you realized the biggest church in America which is The Catholic church is more FERVENTLY RELIGIOUS than any Black church? Once again judging where you don’t have any proof unless you have been to every Black church in America and every Black neighborhood in America and can prove that and I’m sure you can’t!
I have no ignorance I said and I’ll say it again
SHOW ME A WHITE OR HISPANIC CHURCH IN THE MAINSTREAM THAT ACCEPTS LGBT……..Key words (MAINSTREAM) you won’t find one.
And you living next door to one Black family don’t prove anything! OKAY
WORRY about yours and leave ours alone. NO OFFENSE
I don’t know a race who tolerates HOMOSEXUALITY. NOT A ONE! They all have their reservations and oppositions about it.
And also you said: I AM OPPOSED to the deep strain of homophobia ingrained in the African Church which makes itself known through a less-tolerant attitude along the line of WHITE SOUTHERN CHRISTIAN groups within African American society.
MY DEAR THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST MOVEMENT WHICH IS 99% WHITE HATES HOMOSEXUALITY AND CONDONES THE PEOPLE TO HELL. LIKE I said go to every Black church in this country and see for yourself. Until then………………..
ENOUGH SAID.
johnny morales
Mr C – the LARGEST AfAm church is the BAPTIST Church.
There are 2.5 MILLION AfAm Catholics.
There are several million other Evangelical/Fundamentalist Af/Am church flavors like Pentacostal, Methodist – NONE known for their friendliness to Gay Rights.
OH and the Black Muslims nearly a million are included.
80% of AfAms said they were VERY religious, by far the highest # of any group, even Hispanics were way lower.
The fact that WHITE churches can be just as conservative is true, but NO ONE IS ASSUMING WHITE CHURCHES ACCEPT GAY RIGHTS!
YOU ARE DEFENDING BLACK CHURCHES from my statements that they are extremely conservative, and extremely opposed to gay rights.
Even more pathetic, you clearly you think they MUST BE MORE accepting because they are oppressed.
IN THAT YOU ARE WRONG 100%
The Episcopal church in the USA is losing members over its nomination of a gay bishop to the African congregations who REFUSE to acknowledge his position or even him. Oh and the fact that Iranians are bad too is no defense.
The BLACK CHURCH (and it IS called that and you know that if you watched Reverend Wright talk.) grew out of the MOST conservative elements of religious teaching OF ALL WHITE religions in the USA.
It blended the HISTORICAL HOMOPHOBIC CULTURAL BELIEFS that came over when they were forced to come here.
Outside of South Africa, the African continent is the most brutally anti-gay place on the planet.
I have to stop, I try not to d lazy, uninformed people’s research.
Did IT EVER OCCUR TO YOU BLACK CHURCHES would have WEBSITES – yet another source of info.
They tell you their dogma, but you have to be religious to know the implications.
All groups have homophobic members, but the African American churches are some of the MOST extreme.
You do know how the use of the modifier “most” finalizes the meaning of the whole statement don’t you?
Just ask your African American friends – they’ll tell you this is true.
Oh wait, judging from your comments YOU DON’T HAVE ANY EXCEPT GAY ONES – and neither do any of the obviously VERY WHITE people trying to speak up and defend African Americans from my comments.
They are VERY PROUD of their RELIGIOUS traditions.
And you do NOT get that do you. You think I’m trying to insult them, that I’m racist for talkinb about AFrican Americans being so proudly religious and very conservative too – I am NOT. You are, you won’t even do the research to properly respect the culture. I did and have many times.
They believe them and follow them just like some white people do, but when it comes to GAY rights, the most extreme opponents can be found in the Black Church – and they have their reasons.
The fact you do NOT know just how conservative they are just proves you do not know anything about them.
HOW DO I KNOW THIS – Well how did you get your MISinformation?
What I know I know through a variety of methods, one is called research, another is called actually asking religious folk. They’re happy to share, because they believe the right thing to do is to at least try to save your soul by explaining what a sin homosexuality is.
Instead of getting angry – I listened. It was educational and informative.
I do NOT normally help lazy people making a fool of themselves with direct links,, but you’d never find this info. You wouldn’t know where to look – so here it is.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17057-2004Nov1.html
The most recent study I’ve been “quoting” was done by the PEW Charitable trust.
Of course since you haven’t heard of it, no doubt it isn’t real, no doubt it’s all lies uh huh yeah.
The Black Church leadership can barely contain their anger when someone tries to equate the struggle for gay rights with civil rights – it’s clearly a huge insult to them.
Their short answer is You canNOT hide the color of your skin. Being gay is your choice – living in sin has its consequences.
You just don’t get the true meaning of that do you?
But you are right, it is a RELIGIOUS issue, not a racial one.
So why do you keep arguing as if I’m saying it’s all about race?
Charley
No transgender delegates ? Black or white ? Lookout boys, trouble brewing at the DNC convention this year. Look at HRC dinner in LA with the mayor objecting to T exclusion. Same thing can happen at DNC convention. Let’s hope it does. I don’t care if the DNC is embarrased. Equal justice under the law is the issue. DNC’s Leah Daughtrey, convention chairman, does not include transgendered people, anymore than she approves of same-sex marriage. One coconut palm said to the other coconut palm, “Hold on to your nuts, this is no ordinary hurricane”.
Charley
I meant to say “trangender people”. You can’t be transgendered any more than you can be gayed.