Anyone Who Attends DNC’s Gay Fundraiser Will Be ‘Outed’

This, we love: We hear the Washington Blade is planning on camping out at the much-maligned GLBT fundraiser the Democratic National Committee is foolishly moving ahead with — and will snap photos/video of anyone attending. Yea, gay media! Meanwhile, with openly gay Reps. Tammy Baldwin and Jared Polis co-sponsoring the fundraiser (along with Barney Frank), the pair both released separate statements regarding Obama’s DOJ brief on DOMA (read them at Towleroad). Baldwin declared she was “profoundly disappointed”; Polis said filing the brief was “a HUGE mistake.” Both are still, despite calls for them to skip it, going to hit up the event.

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #democraticnationalcommitteelgbtleadershipcouncil #democrats #dnc stories and more


  • emb

    The GLBT money for the DNC and Obama should dry up until this Administration follows through on its promised actions on DOMA and DODT. I’m afraid the extension of some benefits to the partners of GLBT federal employees smacks of a last-minute gesture, and frankly it’s not enough. After the last 2 weeks of proactive argument in support of a discriminatory law and policy, Obama needs to do more than make a nice, but limited, gesture. I voted for him; I had and still have, somewhere, high hopes for his presidency; but I’m fresh out of patience and will not be mollified with a little pat on the head.

    Squeeze ’em where it hurts: Money.

  • Sam

    Yeah, I’m totally not satisfied with the first official recognition of same-sex relationships by the federal government! He should solve all our problems by the end of the week, or I’m through!

  • kevin57

    Thus we have a late news item I heard on Rachel’s show…Obama plans to offer same sex partners federal benefits. They’re feeling the heat! Gotta love it!

  • Mollie


    They are not feeling the heat! Our community is only 10% or less of the US population. President Obama is not the bigot that some from our community have tried to assert. In fact, while I do not agree with some things, I think alot of this is being stirred up and played up by republican gays and those gays who have never gotten over the fact that Hillary lost the nomination. So at every turn on this site, datalounge and others, they blow every single syllable, action, or statement from the Obama administration out of proportion in an effort to try to divide our community and to try to keep our community suspect of Obama’s every move. If that’s in fact the strategy, it is not working! Most I know, still are willing to let President Obama at least serve his term out and then will make a judgement on him about what he has or has not done.

  • ChristopherM


    Well he could at least not give our enemies ammo for weeks to come via a government-endorsed brief. Can’t you just see the next NOM fundraising letter? “Like President Obama’s Department of Justice, we think states have the right to withhold marriage rights to gay people, just like they have the right to withhold marriage from people who are related.” Fuck this.

  • emb

    @Mollie: Nice try at apologetics, but the fact that this somewhat lukewarm and piddly act (compared with the Administration’s vigorous, enthusiastic, and downright Bushly support in court recently for DOMA and DADT) comes right on the heels of well-heeled big-bucks homo-donators pulling out of a DNC fundraiser doesn’t look like a coincidence. But for this Obama-supporter, it’s not enough and too long in coming. Until he does what he said he would during the campaign, and ends DOMA and DADT, I am not willing to withhold judgment. I want him to succeed even if that means pressing him–I don’t want to wait for him to fail four years from now so I can point fingers at him.

  • Mollie


    How many days has President Obama been in the White House? Hum, could it be less than 160 days? Any person who states to me that because a President has not fulfilled their promises to a community eventhough hat Pesident has only been in office for less than 160 days, is completely devoid of reason and logic. Good try. Not.

  • Dusty

    …and then you’ll vote for…..?

  • Movement Guy

    What would be the point of this “outing?” I’m certain that many LGBT leaders will be in attendance as well many donors who support our community organizations. There are numerous ways to influence policy, but I increasingly feel that the attacks on the Obama administration are fueled, not by its actions, but by a hysterical reaction to the Prop 8 ruling.

    It’s one thing to protest the president’s actions, write the White House, write congressional leaders, but this “outing” (particularly in the wake of the “meet on the mall” debacle) is quickly turning our movement into a circular firing squad. With no coherent strategy and sub- or counter-movement with a a leader or leaders to use this opportunity to articulate some actionable demands with a realistic set of demands, we’re simply attacking each other.

  • alan brickman

    I think it’s brilliant!!! closet cases for obama!!

  • Mollie


    If he has not, at the end of his first term, not fuffilled any promises made to our community, I will look at voting for another candidate. But saying after less than 150 days in office, that it’s over he has not fulfilled any promises to our community so therefore screw him, is totally irrational thinking. It does not make any sense.

  • Mollie

    @Movement Guy:

    I am in complete agreement with you. If this is the continued strategy by those in leadership, if will backfire completely.

  • Dusty

    I agree. My suspicion is that Obama will make one his landmark speeches at some point. I could be wrong, but until that time, why not give the guy some space.

  • Movement Guy


    Agreed. I do think the administration needs to be called on the carpet for the DOMA brief, but the hysteria is unwarranted.

    I think that giving benefits to partners of federal employees, though certainly an attempt at appeasement, shows that they want to work with us. Bush would have told us to go shit in our collective hat. What we need is a strategy that keeps up this momentum without shooting ourselves in the foot.

  • Orpheus_lost

    @Dusty: I’ll vote Green or Libertarian before I pull the lever for a homophobe like Obama again. It’s pathetic to read the posts of self-hating fags on this site who are always so quick with the usual lines, “Oh! He’s only been in office for 3..4..5..months! He hasn’t had time to do anything!” His DOJ had time to work up and submit a briefing that lumps us in with pedophilia and incest. And then there’s the smarmy “…and then you’ll vote for…..?” that you just used like there’s no other choice out there but for us to continue wasting our time, money and votes on the very people holding us down. You may get some perverse thrill from being considered abnormal and dirty but I don’t. There will be plenty of choices not starting with a “D” come 2010.

  • Movement Guy


    It’s not a leadership decision. From what I can tell, it’s mostly a kneejerk reaction by a handful of bloggers (who, btw, wrote the Dallas Principles with no community input) and their followers.

  • Movement Guy


    And yet another quarter who has no idea how the law works heard from…

  • schlukitz

    I just watched the Rachael Maddow video on this late breaking news from the White House.

    According to Chuck Todd, there were not a lot of details available at this time, nor, did he wish to speculate on the President’s intentions.

    It appears that this is merely a memorandum from Mr. Obama and NOT an executive order, which means that that these federal benefits would only be available to same sex partners of federal employees during Mr. Obama’s tenure as President with no guarantee that they would continue after a new election in 2012.

    No doubt, more details and additional clarification will be forthcoming tomorrow.

  • Dusty

    How dare you use my mentors name as an appellation.

  • Orpheus_lost

    @Movement Guy: LOL! You can take that quarter and use it toward a law book or two. I’ve heard all the excuses and pandering from the self-haters and apologists and they all come up short. This is Obama’s DOJ – he picked the head and they are accountable to the executive. It’s been proved that the DOJ does not have to argue in favor of laws it believes are unconstitutional. And lastly, even if they did have to do so (which they don’t) they certainly did not need to argue that our relationships are akin to pedophilia and incest or that saving federal dollars is a good reason for denying us our human rights.

    So please tell me, since you are obviously so experienced with the law and civil rights, why this quarter has no idea how the law works.

  • Orpheus_lost

    @Dusty: Do you know exactly what a mentor is? If so, tell me how a mythical being has become your mentor. LOL!

  • Dusty

    Oh, i was thinking Cocteau.

  • Orpheus_lost

    @Dusty: I suggest you go back to your mentor, then, and ask him what he thinks of smarmy comments like “…and then you’ll vote for…..?” and while you’re at it you might ask about standing up for human rights. You might even question how much of a mentor he’s been to you since you didn’t even remember his fucking name.

  • Dusty

    don’t look back, dear.

  • Movement Guy


    Ahem… Law that is not legislative proceeds from precedent or interpretation. I read the brief and the cases cited were not used to compare us to incest or pedophilia, as certain hysterics contend, but to demonstrate instances in which states were exempted from acknowledging marriages recognized from other states or countries. The girl in Wilkins v. Zelichowski was not a “child” but a 16-year-old. As an adult she wished to have her marriage annulled. The “incest” case was a marriage between first cousins legally recognized in their home country, something not uncommon in certain societies.

    That these cases and precedents existed was part of Diane Feinstein’s arguments again DOMA, citing it as unnecessary. So they can be used for both sides.

  • Pete Acton

    Obama is controlled by his black AME connections. And he filters that to his butt-boy Raum. Sorry LGBT community, we are at the “bottom” of the to-do-list for this prez. He sends his wife to campaign for him to the LGBT community. Obama is a failure and I say this as a progressive gay male. He is vanilla on everything, the economy, reforming Wall Street and what will be the health care reform we need to level our society. Obama places his “religious” views of what marriage is before his objectivity as a lawyer or a the defender of the constitution. I say no more gay money, no more gay dollars to him or the DNC until some Senator gets the message and sponsors real legislation for us. Oh, and that fundraiser in DC — shameful. Anyone attending it (ahem Keith Boykin) should be outed for sticking their nose up the ass holes of DC money and politics.

  • Orpheus_lost

    @Movement Guy: Ahem… First you say the cases weren’t used to compare our relationships to incest and pedophilia (or pederasty if you want to be more specific) then you go on to state exactly the opposite. Is there no limit to the depths you Obama fluffers will go to in your attempts to prop up that empty, homophobic suit?

  • schlukitz

    @Movement Guy:

    It should be noted that this is extracted from the Congressional Record, dated September 10, 1996, long before any states had enacted same-sex marriage.

    It should also be noted that Ms. Feinstein by stating that she personally believed that a marriage was between one man and one woman, was not arguing in favor of same-sex marriage by asking Congress to vote NO on the issue, but was arguing against the federal ursurping of states rights. No altruist for the lGBT community.

    And like Mr. Obama, Ms. Feinstein has not proven herself to be a “fierce ally” with respect to our civil-rights. In fact, since the passing of DOMA, Ms. Feinstein has been as noticeably silent on SSM, DADT, ENDA and the repeal of DOMA as the President himself.

    Obviously, your understanding for the injection of incest and pedophila is at odds with the understanding of not only the LGBT community, but the media as well. I find it interesting that you take no offense from the inclusion of those words in the brief, when I can think of no one who is not incensed by it.

    That of course, could be attributed to your need to be an Obama apologist as so many posters on these threads also feel the need to be.

  • Movement Guy

    I’m far from an Obama apologist. In fact, I didn’t support him in the primaries. What I’m increasingly tired of, though, is a bunch of ranting howler monkeys screeching for everything yesterday. I work in the movement. Everyday. I believe passionately in our rights, but day after day, all I see is cries for the most assimilationist goals with no thought and no strategy. We used to be a movement for sexual liberation, and now based on what I see and on most blogs, all we want is to be treated like straight people. And only the most knee jerk reactionary responses to anything Obama does. It’s childish and unproductive.

  • Dennis

    Look, I am appalled at the (Bush appointee/holdover drafted, Eric Holder approved) ‘slap in the face’ DOMA brief…Everyone wants Obama beheaded over this, and it was a serious mistake… a total lack of communication and oversight on his part.

    That said, this craptastic fundraiser could actually benefit forward movement on our issues if the risk of “public shame” turns this event into a REAL DEMAND for accountabilty and not just another ass kissing event. Attendees would be wise to use this as a forum to demand action, and not lip service on our issues.

  • schlukitz

    I do hope that this post will not be perceived as being preachy. It is not my desire to lecture anyone. My intent is simply to raise consciousness.

    As I read these posts I am struck by the recurring necessity of so many posters to walk on egg shells, apologize for and pussy-foot about with respect to addressing Mr. Obama or holding his feet to the fire on the campaign promises that he made to the LGBT community.

    What seems to be lost on so many of the Obama apologists on these threads, is the fact that our President, like all governmental employees, is a public servant whose is salary is paid by the taxpayers of this country and who are, in fact, his employers and bosses, not the other way around.

    All employees, including public servants, deserve the respect that is owed to them. Likewise, the bosses who hired that employee deserve the same respect in return. We should be able to have honest, direct and productive communication with our chief employee without the need of having to hold our hat in our hands or beg for an audience with him.

    As our President’s employer, we the people have every right to keep tabs on our President’s performance of the assigned duties and responsibilities of his office, including those promises he made to the voters when he was running for that office. That also includes our right to question his lack of performance at any given point in his tenure. An employer should not be obliged to wait until the employee is either in the mood or damned good and ready explain his ineptitude or lack of performance.

    This is especially true when the President promises to institute action on issues keen to the GLBT community immediately upon being sworn in. It matters not how long he has been in office, whether it be one month, five months or two years and discussions about how much time he should be allowed to make good on his promises are moot and totally unproductive.

    The fact remains that he has shirked his duty and just like any other employee, he can and should be called into the boss’ office for an explanation for his failure to deliver the goods. If we are not capable of acting in the capacity of an employer by taking full responsibility for the performance, or lack thereof, of our chief employee, then we deserve all the crappy performance and disrespect that we get from this employee.

  • Liz

    Stop defending Bigot Hypocrite Obama.

    You’re sounding more and more like Log Cabin Republicans, AKA B*tt Boys for Bigots.

  • RM

    @Mollie: As a Democrat who voted for Obama in the primary and gave him money during the campaign, I can assure you that your assumption is wrong. I’m genuinely pissed at the man, and I’m not taking any more excuses on his behavior towards gays.

  • RM

    @Movement Guy: Mentioning incest and pedophilia in the same sentence as same-sex marriage is not comparing gay relationships to incest and pedophilia. Just like putting watermelons in the front lawn of the white house is not racist.

  • schlukitz


    Beautiful. Loved your correlation of watermelons to racism to demonstrate the vileness of correlating incest and pederasty to gay relationships in the same sentence.

  • Vanhattan

    @schlukitz: Well said.

  • Landon Bryce

    @Mollie: Are we to assume then that you are under the impression that the president will be restaffing his administration every six months? Because that’s not the case, you see. This Cabinet, which includes no open gay or lesbian people, will not change much before the next election. Tim Kaine and the other gay-haters put into positions of great power by Obama will continue to fight against our equality at every turn. There are no gays or allies in his inner circle. And that won’t change. So the hostile attitude won’t change either.

  • Landon Bryce

    @Movement Guy: You know what’s childish and silly? Pining for the days when gay rights meant sexual liberation. That was before AIDS, before most of the gay men who used the word “assimilationist” died from their sexual liberation. It is immoral for you to be pressing an agenda that killed most gay American men of my age.

  • InExile

    @schlukitz: Very well said and very well thought out points. We should not have to beg to be heard, our tax dollars pay their salaries and our contributions helped put these people in office. If we do not hold them accountable, who will? It is our job as citizens of this country to let our politicians know when their performance is not up to par.

    As far as time schedules for enacting LGBT rights,we have been waiting a very long time already. Our movement started 40 years ago at Stonewall and there has been little to no progress legislatively during this time. I have seen posters say the economy, the banks, health care, and even global warming is MORE important than our rights. I do not see it this way. These very difficult times make life that much harder for gay people trying to make it WITHOUT the same rights and benefits enjoyed by heterosexuals.

    The pressure placed on the democrats must continue. Only if we are demanding our rights and keeping up the pressure will our politicians realize that this time we refuse to be thrown under the bus. Enough is enough!

  • schlukitz


    Thank you for your kind words.

    And you are absolutely right. These very difficult times do, indeed, make life that much harder for gay people trying to make it WITHOUT the same rights and benefits enjoyed by heterosexuals.

    All the more reason why we must keep the pressure on our elected officials to do what is right.

    Someone once said “We get the quality of government that we deserve.”

    Whoever that person was, I think that he was definitely onto something.

  • Orpheus_lost

    @Movement Guy: People who are “in the movement” don’t have to announce in their name AND in their comments that they’re “in the movement”. Besides that, the movement you claim to be in ended when the supreme court ruled that sodomy could not be made a crime (Lawrence v. Texas). Here in the 21st century, yes, we’re looking to be treated like straight people with the same rights, benefits and responsibilities. And since you can’t seem to understand exactly why we would want that, I’ll tell you. WE’RE HUMAN BEING WHO DEMAND OUR HUMAN RIGHTS! NOW!

    Lastly, I’ll let you in on a secret. People who are truly, honestly “in the movement”, as you so often claim, don’t come to the comments section of a blog to gather strategy. This is the place to express our feelings, not to plan the gay version of the Allied Invasion.

  • schlukitz


    And thank you, Sir.

  • galefan2004

    I don’t agree with this. I feel it that politics and coming out should be personal choices. Of course, if they run the photos without signed consent forms they are opening themselves up to so many law suits big enough to shut them down its not even funny, so my guess is that this is just lip service.

  • James in NYC

    How exactly did “Republican gays” and “gays who have never gotten over the fact that Hillary lost the nomination” stir up the DOJ brief in Smelt v. United States? I have no idea what the Log Cabin Republicans think of all this, and as a gay Hillary supporter I quickly became an enthusiastic Obama supporter once he won the nomination. Besides, she’s now a member of his administration, and I hold the entire administration responsible for what it does on gay issues. I don’t need Republicans or the Clintons to tell me what to be angry about.

    Having just been told by John Berry that it’s MY responsibility to gather votes in the House and Senate to overturn DOMA ( ;p=2#latest), and having read the DOJ brief saying that DOMA is “neutral” and not motivated by any animus toward gay people, that Loving v. Virginia has no application to DOMA, that there is a state interest and promoting straight marriage but not gay marriage, I don’t need any more stirring up.

    They take, take, take, and don’t give. This little stunt today is a temporary measure and God knows what it will contain, but it won’t contain any health benefits. In the meantime, there’s no indication whatsoever that the White House is trying to gather votes for any of its supposed priorities (hate crimes, ENDA, repeal of DADT and DOMA) or even preparing contingency plans for the repeal of DADT. In fact, although they claim to be “working with the Pentagon” on this, the Pentagon itself denies it.

    What the hell are they doing? Asking for money, asking for organizational help, asking for letters, asking for telephone calls, from gay people — and for what? For health care reform, for Sotomayor! Are health care activists being asked by Obama to phone their Congressmen on DOMA? Are Hispanic Sotomayor boosters being asked for funds to advocate the repeal of DADT? Heavens, no!

    We’re being promised, in effect that nothing WILL happen for us until Obama’s second term (so we’d better damn well be sure he’s re-elected). In other words, we’re being threatened — no second term, no nothing.

    I’m sick of being a sucker. These people are playing us. Speaking of Hillary, I vividly recall when Obama took gay votes away from her by upping her ante on DOMA. She was for partial repeal, he was for full repeal. I guess if she’d wanted to go back to the moon, he’d have wanted to go to Mars. It’s easy to promise what you don’t intend to deliver.

  • galefan2004

    @Mollie: If you think a small vocal minority can not cause a large change in this country then please look up ALCOHOL PROHIBITION. Also, stop thinking that the only people that vote favorably for, or take a stand on, gay rights are gay people. Hell, I come from small town Ohio, and the majority of the people I have met there in the course of my life are 100% behind gay rights (especially DADT repeal and DOMA removal).

  • galefan2004

    @Mollie: Yes it has been 160 days, but what you fail to comprehend is that in the exact same amount of time it took the Obama regime to pen that hatefully worded brief in defense of DOMA, Obama could have picked up a pen took out the right form (I’m assuming there is a form for this sort of thing) and put a stop loss on gays from the military. Stop using time as an excuse when its quite obvious after the DOMA brief where the man stands. He has already tipped his hand, and he can’t put the cards back in the pile now.

  • James in NYC

    “Of course, if they run the photos without signed consent forms they are opening themselves up to so many law suits big enough to shut them down its not even funny, so my guess is that this is just lip service”

    No they’re not. It’s a public event, and the arrivals and departures are public. And the people they’ll be outing are public figures anyway.

  • galefan2004

    @schlukitz: Seriously, if you think about it, what could be a bigger screw you to the gay population then to say, if you vote for me in 2012 then your brothers and sisters that work for federal government will be able to keep the measly rights that I, the great and oh powerful Obama, have given them. However, if you don’t vote for me in 2012, then you are stripping rights away from your own people. This move REEKS of politics.

  • galefan2004

    @Orpheus_lost: Dude, I so want to see 1000 drag queens and 1000 go go boys storm the Washington DC beaches.

  • galefan2004

    @James in NYC: The funniest thing is, that Hillary kept my support through out the entire primary. You see, the problem with Hillary was that she was and still is to damn honest for politics. When Obama upped his anti it was because he was playing a game of dishonest politics and promising everyone he was wanting support from the world. Hillary said it best when she gave unofficial support to McCain, “Obama knows how to give a good speech.”

  • Cam

    Have you noticed that AS SOON as people talked about boycotting this fundraiser, Barney Frank went from saying that Obama SHOULD NOT push gay marriage, to blasting the administration over it’s DOMA defense AND introducing ENDA legislation?!

    Litterally, Frank did that within a day or so of people talking about boycotting this fundraiser. So don’t talk to ME that boycotts don’t do anything.

  • Cam

    @Mollie: you said “They are not feeling the heat! Our community is only 10% or less of the US population. President Obama is not the bigot that some from our community have tried to assert. In fact, while I do not agree with some things, I think alot of this is being stirred up and played up by republican gays and those gays who have never gotten over the fact that Hillary lost the nomination. ”

    Really? Are GOP and Hillary gays the ones that instructed THEIR department of Justice to defend DOMA in court with a brief that compares gay relationships to Incest? No, that was THIS adminstration.

  • RichardR

    This thread has scrambled itself: Obama v. Clinton; Obama v. us; our issues v. everybody’s issues; outing closet cases v. revealing inexplicably loyal LGBT democratic donors.

    So like us. Vital, but not always focused.

    And I shall further digress: I think the DOJ brief is about incompetence. Just bad management on the part of this administration and its justice department. To me, that’s as worrying as the Bush holdover Mormon’s anti-gay motivation.

  • Jim

    @schlukitz: Beautifully stated.

  • schlukitz


    Absolutely. The ultimate “Fuck You” is blaming the crime on the victim.

  • schlukitz


    Thank you for your kind comments, Sir.

  • Jimmy G

    My reading of the Obama administration is that we are getting more of the same old disrespect that Bush Administration gave us…. no real difference. Except the Republicans had the integrity to tell it to our faces.

    The GLBT is very creative and independent, since most of our lives we had to be that way, since doors were not open to us.

    Why don’t we transfer our movement to the Green Party and join others to create a powerful new progressive coalition there from the ground up. What have we got to lose with the Democrats or Republicans? Table scraps.

    Lets move on from the democrats and build a new party which won’t “throw us under the bus’ and “knife us for good measure”.

    No more money or support from me for those who do not support my basic human rights.

  • Peter Better

    Talk about self-defeating. If gays turn on democrats its not going to make them do what we want but rather ignore us entirely. This is sheer stupidity! Frankly, a group this stupid doesn’t deserve any rights.

  • Recidivist

    It seems only yesterday that Obama was almost everyone’s best friend and now he has failed us. How the mightly fall.

    I understand the issue and also understand that in five months the man has had to tackle everything from thieving banks, greedy wall street CEOs, a recalcitrant congress (even his own party), and the list just goes on and on.

    For him to give everything that our community wants, he is going to have to go to congress and right now I wouldn’t give him or us a plugged nickel for our chances. Maybe he should win the ones he can and try to do what he can. I know that certainly doesn’t sit well and it shouldn’t. It shouldn’t. But it could be worse: those two neanderthals Bush and Cheney could still be in office.

    Maybe what we need to do is elect some intelligent senators and congressmen who will help pass this agenda. One man cannot do it all and with Obama, I think we have a better chance than ever before. Just a thought.

Comments are closed.