DNC Needs $50 Million to Survive November’s Elections. And They’re Gonna Do It Without the Gays

In March, the Democratic National Committee raised a handsome $13 million. And that’s even with you homosexuals boycotting The Party Of No Probably, But Don’t Hold Us To It! But the mid-term elections are coming up, which means it’s gonna be a balls-to-the-wall advertising blitz this summer and fall as the Dems try not to screw up everything they worked so hard for in 2008 by winning both the executive and legislative branches of government. Which means the DNC is going to have to get supporters to drum up cash. To the tune of $50 million, an “unprecedented” sum, says DNC chairman Tim Kaine. And that means Obama is going to pander to a new set of voters — who will also find reason to be disappointed in Democrats post-election. Fun!

The DNC’s plan, which will be announced Wednesday, calls for reaching those first-time voters — most of whom are registered independents and are young or minorities — through the same vehicles Obama employed in 2008, according to internal party documents provided by the committee. The DNC is focusing on staff and volunteers in all 50 states, personal communication with the president via new media, and sophisticated voter-targeting technology. In the video message to his supporters, Obama said his administration’s success depends on the outcome of this fall’s elections and warned that if Republicans regain control of Congress, they could “undo all that we have accomplished.”

“This year, the stakes are higher than ever,” he said, according to a transcript of his remarks provided by Democratic officials. “It will be up to each of you to make sure that young people, African Americans, Latinos and women who powered our victory in 2008 stand together once again. “If you help make sure that first-time voters in 2008 make their voices heard again in November,” he added, “then together we will deliver on the promise of change, hope and prosperity for generations to come.”

In addition to direct communication with supporters, Obama is stepping up his fundraising efforts and plans to crisscross the country this fall stumping for Democrats, according to DNC Chairman Timothy M. Kaine and White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer.

Now please don’t make this more difficult than it has to be, complaining about how donating money to the DNC, or Democratic candidates at large, somehow entitles you to count on their support once you put them (back) in office.

Besides, word has it the Dems are already planning on cutting off the Gs.

[Washington Post]

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #politics #barackobama #democraticnationalcommittee stories and more


  • AndrewW

    John Aravosis’ “Don’t Ask, Don’t Give” boycott of the DNC didn’t accomplish anything. Just like GetEqual’s stunts to embarrass the President, Speaker and a Committee Chairman – all not helpful.

    Pissing on our fiends may get a few headlines, but it won’t get us any support.

    We’re smarter than this.

  • Stevious

    Good luck with that, sorry about losing those 40 seats…

  • delurker again

    If Dems lose in Nov, it won’t be because of the gays sitting out or not contributing.

  • Baxter

    @AndrewW: Are the Dems really our friends? Sure they seem really nice when they need our money and votes, but they refuse to go to bat for us when we need them. With friends like that…

  • Brian

    Well, I guess Obama is showing his true colors, with word they are going to take gay rights off the Administration agenda entirely. Well being on the bottom of the to do list was as good as a fail anyway, so at least now they are being more honest. It makes them liars, but at least they are finally coming clean.

  • Kyle


    I’m sure it was a typo, but your choice of the word “fiends” is accurate.

  • AndrewW

    @Kyle: I agree, works both ways.

  • ChicagoJimmy

    Vote for alternative candidates. Both parties are corporate owned and Obama would be a Republican by 1950’s standards. Let’s get some actual progressives elected.

  • Symonds

    Nope. Hold your nose, vote for them again. It sucks. It really, really sucks. But you gotta do it.

    We’re not choosing between the party that wants to work on gay rights and the party that doesn’t. We’re choosing between the party that thinks we’re the fucking devil and the party that doesn’t care about us. Is the right answer to that not painfully obvious? This isn’t a vote for gay rights, but it is a vote to keep the door open.

  • Tim W

    @AndrewW: Yes because our “fiends” have been really helping us out. Yeah your right it’s because of Get Equal and the boycott we’re getting nothing. It we just keep our mouths shut and be good little boys and girls maybe the Dems will get around to us at the earliest 2012 but probably not until 2016.

  • Paschal

    @ChicagoJimmy: With the U.S.A.’s current electoral system your wish will not come true.

  • AndrewW

    @Tim W: The reality is that as much as you want to piss on our friends, there was some progress – until GetEqual’s silly stunts.

    If you actually believe public expressions of anger are helpful, please explain. The “test” for any action is whether or not it provides support or even sympathy for our movement.

    These stunts do neither.

  • Kurt

    What gay boycott? The money is rolling into the DNC from gay and straight alike. I sent my check in.

  • Baxter

    @Symonds: Fun fact: not all Republicans or Democrats fit the stereotype of their party. There are Republicans out there who support gay rights and there are Democrats who think we’re the devil. You’re also allowed to vote for people who do not belong to either of the major parties. That is not “throwing your vote away”. “Throwing your vote away” is wasting it on some Democrat who says nice things but doesn’t deliver, or voting for someone like Bill Clinton who did more to set back gay rights than his Republican successor ever did.

    I say we start ignoring the party labels altogether and start looking at the actual candidates.

  • Sam

    No gay should EVER give money to the DNC. Ever, ever, ever. They funnel cash into the campaigns of anti-gay Democrats all over the country and have for years. That’s my only problem with this “boycott:” any LGBT person who knows anything about politics has already been refusing to give money to the DNC, even with Andy Tobias as a major cheerleader.

    We should be giving money to candidates who are in tight races and are 100% pro-equality while abandoning candidates who are in tight races but less than 100%. Send a donation to Barbara Boxer or Alexi Giannoulis and then a note to Blanche Lincoln saying “I was going to help you win, but then I saw your HRC rating and decided to send a donation to a candidate with a 100% rating instead.”

    Even better: get involved in primaries and donate to candidates who support equality, whether they are Democrats or Republicans.

    There’s a whole basket of tools available and we need to use them all. To think the question is solely whether or not to give to the DNC is simply naive.

  • tjr101

    It’s no surprise the DNC is still rolling in the dough. The gay vote and financial support is quite insignificant in the realm of things. Republicans have continually won office while ignoring or at best insulting the gay community at the same time, hence they don’t need the gay vote.

    The DNC is probably trying this same tact as politics is all about the numbers. The Latino vote is what both parties can’t ignore and you will see action on immigration reform being pushed up the priority list.

  • Jorge


    Exactly! Pay attention to who you’re voting for and donating to. Maine has two Republican Senators who are lead sponsors of ENDA. Other states have Democrat Senators who are holding the bill up. Give directly to candidates.

  • Jeff K.

    Being an unemployed student, I can’t donate to the Democrats, but If I had the money I would, no matter how much it hurts, because if they lose, that means the Republicans win. And it goes without saying that that would hurt more.

    Maybe at the same time we advocate for gay rights we should also push for electoral reform to allow for third parties and more choice.

  • Kyle

    If you still think donating money to democrats is worthwhile (I doubt it), you can donate to the DCCC and the DSCC. It helps congressional races rather than giving money to the DNC where lord knows where that money goes. There you will be helping individual candidates rather than the party.

  • Bill Perdue


    Tim Kaine, Obama’s appointee to run the DNC, is a pigheaded opponent of same sex marriage, just like Obama.

    Kaine ran a gay baiting campaign against one of his primary opponents, supported the invasions and occupations, opposed stem cell research, is anti-union and opposes reproductive choice for women.


    Leah Daughtry, Chief of Staff at the DNC is an ordained pentecostal preacher who, again like Obama, is a pigheaded opponent of same sex marriage.

    Daughtry wants the Democratic Party to be one of “people of faith” and has done more than her part to make that true. She and then DNC Chairman Howard Dean fired their own GLBT outreach director in an act of blatant discrimination and lost the lawsuit filed against them.

    Daughtry likes to keep a low profile for obvious reasons. She’s a cultist, a religious nut and an anti-LGBT bigot.

    Daughtry, who keeps an altar at home and devotes a predawn hour a day to prayer and Bible study, is on a mission to narrow the “God gap” between Democrats and Republicans by winning over religious voters who have flocked to the GOP over the last 20 years. …

    LA Times

    In her positions as Dean’s top aid and the convention’s top official, Daughtry, who is 44 years old, is leading the Democratic Party’s new mission to make religious believers — particularly ardent Christian believers — view the party and its candidates as receptive to, and often impelled by, the dictates of faith. She sparked this crusade, both to transfigure the party’s image as predominantly secular and to take enough votes from the Republicans to win this year’s presidential election…

    NY Times

    Daughtry opposed mandated GLBT candidates at the last Democrat convention because we haven’t faced “historic discrimination at the voting booth”, ignoring, as queerty pointed out “all those anti-gay marriage initiatives. The Washington Blade

    Daughtry used DNC funds to set up a group called Faith in Action to cement ties between the DNC and anti-LGBT and anti-choice cultists. FIA met weekly at DNC HQ in DC to plan FIA using more DNC funds to finance ‘faith outreach’. In case you’re wondering that meant paying for a “Faith and Values Voters Guide” in local newspapers that supported requiring ” public schools to offer Bible literacy as part of their curriculum” to “pass a constitutional amendment confirming that all life is a gift from God and should be protected; and that life begins at conception” and to “defeat any efforts to redefine marriage or provide the benefits of marriage to a same-sex union.”


    Daughtry says “The wonderful thing about the Democratic Party is that we have room for all kinds of opinions.” Yes, they do. It’s just one big happy tent. Bigot and anti bigot. War and anti-war. Racist and anti-racist. Union and anti-union.

    But guess which side always gets screwed.


  • AndrewW

    Keep heckling the President GetEqual. LGBTeaBaggers.


    @AndrewW: Oh, I plan on it and I hope others keep pushing things forward, because sometimes when you show you are a force to be reckoned with, others quickly try to put a muzzle on you; not only are the Democrats also alienating the LGBTQ community, but the Donkeys are alienating several ethnic minorities, and it will be difficult to twist the disappointment in the administration as “racism.” Who will be their friends then? Never forget who your friends are and who got you to power, because it can easily be challenged and taken away in a Democratic society.

  • Kieran

    This is how you get treated when people assume you’ve got no place else to go. It’s a real smart strategy we’ve got: Vote Democratic—-because they aren’t Republicans!


    We need a third party. Seriously.

  • Steve

    All they have to do is to repeal DADT. Alternatively, they can pass ENDA. Either one will do. (Both would be better.) If they do that, then gay support will be forthcoming.

    Of course, this election is not going to turn on gay issues. It will more likely turn on ordinary pocketbook issues: Jobs, Income, Housing, Credit, Import/Export, and Banking/Finance reform. The D’s have to place the blame squarely on the R’s. Meanwhile, the R’s are going to try to blame the D’s.

    When people are hungry, out-of-work, homeless, or uncomfortable, they look for someone to blame. Look for a dirt-throwing contest. It could get messy.

    If gay people matter to the D’s, or of they actually want the money, they will pass ENDA. If they don’t are about gay people at all, they will just ask for money, and then pretend to be surprised when they don’t get it.

  • AlanReeser

    When the DNC grows some balls, maybe we’ll kick in a buck or two.

  • Storm

    By all means, send your checks. Send them to the DNC. Send them to the RNC. But don’t fill them out. Instead, write across the front of them the reason why you’re NOT filling it out for any amount. “VOID. No rights? No money.”

  • AndrewW

    The LGBT Community may now be adopting a strategy of demanding, but demanding without any real threat is useless. It just makes us look weaker.

    For those of you who now realize that comments on Queerty can be easily “voted” away, must understand how complaining only stifles conversations about real progress.

    The self-proclaimed “activists” think anger resolves everything. It never has.

    So, go ahead and bitch about everything instead of coming up with real solutions.

  • Anderson

    You fudge packers get out the checkbooks and write Obama a check NOW!!

    Yes We Can
    Dems 2010


    Wait one Effing minute! I , for the first time ever clicked on one of the “hidden due to low blah blah..” links.

    So, if you support the Democrats you can be voted down and your comment hidden?

    WTF, no, WHAT THE FUCK kind of bizarre censorship is that? It’s like Gay mob rule or some shit. How do we know that R trolls aren’t just coming on here and voting down all pro Dem comments?

    I am always defending Queerty to my friends. This truly dumbass shit makes that job hella hard.

    Who thought this little feature up? Is Goebbels channeling through you Snatches?

    What else has been censored? I don’t have the patience (nor should I) to go through every subject you’ve posted lately, but, as a loyal reader, I want you to know this shit sucks.

  • jeffree

    @AndrewW: We’re all waiting anxiously to hear your suggestions! So far, youve presented no alternative STRATEGY, so you’re an internet troll.

    Grow up. Stop preaching. Please learn to ADD to the conversation, not just RANT.

  • jeffree

    I won’t personally volunteer for any party, but if an individual politician meets my criteria then I’ll make phone calls or go door to door or whatever.

    @Storm: Good idea! It’s a way for the party to see what they’re missing.

  • tjr101

    @DEREK WASHINGTON: Yep, there are a lot of Republican trolls (Log Cabiners) that not only vote down any comment supporting Democrats but vote up the suggestion of voting Repugnant or third party(which splits the vote in their favor).
    The oldest trick in the book, divide and conquer!


    @DEREK WASHINGTON: A pain in the ass, indeed; some I click, some I know are just name calling. Also, I think it’s rather cowardly to click a little thumb without a “why” or “why not” comment, or knowing a little about the clicker- could be the same person using different e mail addresses to register.

  • Baxter

    @DEREK WASHINGTON: Paranoid much? I’d venture that the vast, vast majority of readers on this site are pretty consistent Democratic voters, so if anything you’re more likely to see anti-Dem comments being voted down. I agree that it’s a dumb system, but suggesting that there’s some vast right wing conspiracy to vote down pro-Dem posts is more than a little nutty.

  • B

    No. 31 · jeffree wrote, “@AndrewW: We’re all waiting anxiously to hear your suggestions! So far, youve presented no alternative STRATEGY, so you’re an internet troll.”

    With most of AndrewW’s comments hidden, hardly anyone would see an “alternate strategy”, so what’s the point of him posting one … even though he sort of did. He was suggesting, whether you agree with him or not, that dumping on the Democrats is a bad strategy, presumably because on the average the Republicans would be even worse. In other words, AndrewW is saying that you are better off holding your noses and voting for the most supportive of the two parties, even if the most supportive of the two is not getting the job done as fast as you would like. You may not agree, but posting that sort of statement hardly qualifies as being a troll.

  • Cassandra


    Any post can be voted down, for any reason. People could vote down posts because they are little more than abuse and name-calling, or make light of an important subject – regardless of the political machine being trumpeted. The hypocrisy of people venting their anger about activists venting their frustration probably inspired a few down votes.

    The whole ‘you have to support the democrats no matter what’ argument is one of the ideas that are offending people. Yes, the Democrats are not as bad as the Republicans – like gonorrhea is not as bad as syphilis. And obscenities and insults do not add up to a sensible reason to waste anymore money on the DNC. If someone has a sensible reason to give financial aid to the Democrat party itself, rather than to the specific known allies, by all means, post it in a persuasive, reasonable manner.

    Odds are, you’ll vote down this post because it criticizes your post. Oh well. I didn’t find much that was useful or persuasive in your obscenity laced venting. Oh well.

    You can focus on the negative – the posts that people don’t like. I think the trend in the posts that are popular is much more interesting – it gives an idea what ideas actually resonate with people. Those posts include the idea of being careful to donate to specific candidates who actively work for our equality, propose reasonable expectations, or articulate a sense of betrayal.

    Personally, I think the posts that people are voting up are much more interesting, much more revealing, than the ones people are voting down.

  • jeffree

    I wish, that I had said that I don’t care for the thumbs down/thumbs up option: my point is this: if all someone wants to do is reject a bad idea, that’s not helpful.
    To engage in a conversation –as opposed to just ranting– means suggesting alternatives.

    Why I find AndrewW lacking is that he, here (& on other blogs which I also follow) doesn’t suggest a BETTER idea; he simply says NO NO NO.

    He also resorts to sockpuppets –other screen-names– who use the same exact syntax, typography, and arguments to bolster his naysaying. Queerty has not seen fit 2 prevent him from doing that.

    He is a incredibly articulate, informed, & smart person, but so far we’ve seen him rally, rave & rant against other peoples opinions without proposing +any+ better ideas.

    I, for one, want 2 hear what he is for, and not just *against.*

    I hope he will rise 2 the occasion.


    @CASSANDRA ETC: I don’t care if someone is pro or anti Dem, I want to read everyone’s comment and don’t need to have sonme stupid vote filter.

    I would rather read that someone hates Dems than have a Dem troll vote them silent and vice versa. The system has no point. If someone doesn’t like a particular commenter, scroll down.


  • Sam

    @Kyle: The DSCC and DCCC still support anti-LGBT candidates, like Blanche Lincoln. And given how much trouble she’s in, a huge portion of any donation to the DSCC is going to go to her.

    DON’T GIVE TO DEMOCRATIC PARTY ORGANIZATIONS! PERIOD! Give to individual candidates who support equality.

  • Sam

    @tjr101: “third party(which splits the vote in their favor)”

    You mean the way Ross Perot helped George H.W. Bush beat Bill Clinton? Oh wait… that’s not what happened.

    A vote for a third party is a vote for a third party. I’m sick of bullshit Republocrats and Dempublicans saying that votes for third parties hurt the system. The Democrats don’t own my vote, and if my only option is to vote for a third party that supports my rights then that is what I’m going to do. And no, it doesn’t help the Republican. So take that bullshit and peddle it somewhere else.

  • AndrewW

    @DEREK WASHINGTON: The idiots from GetEqual are flagging all comments they disagree with. It is making Queerty useless.

  • AndrewW

    @jeffree: That’s not true Jeffree. There has been an honest exchange of ideas. You are just promoting GetEqual.

  • Bill Perdue


    I’d like to have the pro-war, anti-union, anti-choice, pro looter class ideas of Republicans and Democrats exposed for all to see and compare with the views of the left.

    The idea of hiding them is profoundly anti-democratic and I suspect that like similar anti-democratic ideas it has its origins in money. Queerty posts in tabloid form, looking for sensationalism to boost comments. The more comments, and commenter’s with aliases like AndrewW, who uses dozens of them, the more ad revenues.

    For their barechested boy segments Queerty used to have a menu of minipics to choose from. Now you have to click number after number and if the guys hot that’s a lot of clicks and a lot of revenue. More clicks, more revenues. The guy pics thing is irritating but OK if Queerty needs money.

    But this censorship by people afraid to state their own opinions is not. Our movement desperately needs clarity. We need to separate the wheat from the chaff. This is an impediment.

  • Bill Perdue

    @B: Try to stick to the truth B.

    AndrewW didn’t say anything remotely like what you suggested. He did say that people who heckle Obama or demonstrate at the White House are Teabaggers.

    I wonder if that includes the 200,000 people at the National Equality March, which, in spite of the plans of it’s organizers, had a decidedly anti-Obama flavor. How could it not? Did it include the 200,000 at the national march for immigration equality demanding, among other things, health care and critical of Obama’s racist decision to exclude them.

  • John from England(used to be just John but there are other John's)

    @Bill Perdue:

    Of course it does.

    AndrewW is anti-protest full stop.

    @ DerickWashington

    Well, if you think being Democratic is being anti any form or protest are argument against what a statist beaurachratic party is doing, them, erm you don’t understand the meaning of democracy.

    AndrewW is being Conservative. He would probably be a Conservative if he wasnt’t gay or for whatever reason he thinks or feels.

    It’s sad.

    The USA was all about freedom and getting out there. Now, you just want to sit and be shat on.

  • Bill Perdue

    I admit it. I flagged too before I figured it out.


    @Bill Perdue: Never hurts to hear someone out, whether you agree with them or not- the art of listening has been lost by both parties and particular, cable news, where you shout over your guest and cut them off if they’re louder. So much for freedom of speech.

  • Mike in Asheville, nee "in Brooklyn"

    QUEERTY: PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE rethink your “Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to view.” policy.

    Take, for example, posts 28 and 29, both “hidden.” Whether one agrees/disagrees with post 28, the post contributes to the conversation and the poster is making a contribution that helps all of us better understand that there are sincere differences of strategy and tactics IN ORDER TO PROMOTE THE CAUSE OF EQUAL RIGHTS FOR LGBT COMMUNITY. Post 29, on the other hand, is a vile pile of homophobic crap for the amusement of the bigoted poster having his bigoted fun, laughing as he clicks the “Submit” button at the silly faggots letting him take a dump on us on our own site.

    Thumbs UP/DOWN is fine, let people express their support/disagreement. But the hiding formula is greatly flawed. A few suggestions: add a “Homophobe Thumb” and, upon your review that the comments are indeed homophobic, block the IP address; do not allow multiple user names from the same IP address (though allow a process that takes into account that 2 or more people working through the same network are not prevented from posting); require registration after a certain number of postings.

    On this one thread, AndrewW has 3 hidden and 3 unhidden posts. Clearly reading all the posts, they all contribute to the concept of promoting gay rights; none should be hidden. While I regularly disagree with a post, those posts also offer me more insight into the vast breadth of information and ideas that help refine my thinking about the best strategies for continue the push the rights equality.

  • Mike in Asheville, nee "in Brooklyn"

    @No. 20 Bill Purdue

    Wow, what a fucking nightmare! This information is not new, it was somewhat hot when the firings of the gay liaison took place at the DNC. But what is fucking insane is that HRC/Gay Inc. has failed to succeed in the hardball politics of getting friendlies to replace the closeted homophobes.

    I, for one, agree with major portions of both sides of the support/protest the DNC and Obama. The LGBT community should be madder than hell at the DNC/Obama who court our money and votes and then ignore us; ON THE OTHER HAND, pissing on those who can make a difference and prevent the GOP’s clearly anti-gay policies is a bad strategy too.

    Instead of attacking the DNC and President Obama, perhaps the better strategy is to go personal against those within the DNC that actually work against us as diligently and vilely as the GOP and their wingnut minions. The DNC and President Obama are much bigger than gay marriage and DADT; we are getting little to no across the Democratic expanse support as there are other issues important to other Democrats. But focus on Tim Kaine and Leah Daughtry, the DNC leaders who actively work to thwart gay issues. They are the ones who willingly and actively are throwing us under the bus; push all efforts to expose them and Obama will throw them overboard. Until then, Kaine/Daughtry will always be finding ways for Congressional Democrats to find cover.


    @ENGLISHDUDE: The only thing I don’t understand is whatever the fuck it is that you said. What was that, your 2nd semester term paper language that you haven’t had a chance to use lately?

    If you’re gonna call me stupid, call me fucking stupid.

  • Bill Perdue

    No. 50 • Mike in Asheville, nee “in Brooklyn” The problem is that we don’t have much in the way of friends in either party. They want money, volunteers, and support from us and from the christer right.

    But they pander to and ‘reward’ the christer right much more than us.

    There’s another ordained pentecostal bigot, Joshua Dubois. Like Obama, Daughtry, Biden and Kaine he too opposes SSM. (Opposition to SSM is bigotry.) He was the ‘faith outreach’ director of the ’08 Obama campaign and responsible for the dangerous anti-LGBT ‘outreach’ to scum like Donnie McClurkin and Rick Warren, who set the stage for the planned pogrom in Uganda.

    Dubois’ was Obama Rove and organized the campaign to pander to the cult votes, making real inroads capturing catholics and evangelicals but less among racist cults like the southern baptists and the mormons.

    Now, as Obama’s Director of the Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships he’s again playing Rove, using federal funds to bribe or pay off anti-LGBT pulpit pimps.

    The leadership of the Democrat party. since the time of the Clintons are defined as bigots by being Democrats more than the Democrat Party is defined as bigoted by their leadership. The Democrat party is the party of bigots that voted overwhelmingly for DADT and DOMA which Clinton contentedly signed.


    I like the idea of keeping the thumbs but losing the hiding feature. Queerty can have their money and we can have our democracy.

  • Bill Perdue

    No. 50 • Mike in Asheville, nee “in Brooklyn”

    Here’s one way to look at it. McCain and party are going to look you in eye and call you ‘faggot’ and then cackle.

    Obama is going to smile, flash those pearly whites of his, promise to take care of you, pat you on the back and then slip the knife in.

    He’s a gentleman who’d never use hurtful words like faggot – until you leave the room.

  • B

    No. 49 · Mike in Asheville, nee “in Brooklyn” wrote, “But the hiding formula is greatly flawed. A few suggestions: add a ‘Homophobe Thumb’ …”

    I suggested something similar (like, dislike, with a third category for inappropriate or obnoxious comments). QUEERTY ignored it and will ignore your suggestion as well. I suspect the reason is that the people running QUEERTY don’t have the skills needed to add a third button (it’s not just the button but hooking it up to a database that will tag each post). They probably get the software that handles the comments from a third party that won’t care unless lots of its customers (e.g., websites) demand something else.

  • InExile

    @Bill Perdue: Good to know you are finally fully on board with Hillary Clinton as President in 2012. Hillary never would have treated the gays like this. Fool me once shame on you! Fool me twice shame on me!

  • Bill Perdue

    @InExile: Stop slandering me.

    No honest person would never dream of supporting the American version of

  • InExile

    @Bill Perdue: Looks like a couple “community organizers” to me! Is that a job?

  • B

    No. 45 · Bill Perdue lied again by writing, “@B: Try to stick to the truth B. AndrewW didn’t say anything remotely like what you suggested.”

    Perdue, try being honest for a change. You don’t have to agree with AndrewW’s point of view to refrain from lying about what he said or about what I said he said – it’s rather telling that AndrewW is not complaining about my description of what he wrote.

    In comment No 1, AndrewW wrote, “Pissing on our fiends may get a few headlines, but it won’t get us any support. We’re smarter than this.” In No 36 (my only comment before Perdue’s No 45), I paraphrased AndrewW’s statement by saying, “He was suggesting, whether you agree with him or not, that dumping on the Democrats is a bad strategy,” and that is an accurate description. I then commented on his likely rationale for it, with statements like “presumably because on the average the Republicans would be even worse.”

  • Cassandra

    “I want to read everyone’s comment and don’t need to have sonme stupid vote filter.”

    All you have to do to read any hidden comment is click on the words “Click Here to View”.

    Unless you want to have it all your way.

  • Cassandra

    “than have a Dem troll vote them silent”

    Making derogatory assertions about people’s motives for voting is a pretty good reason for voting down your posts – which makes access to anything reasonable that might also be in those posts more difficult.

    “If someone doesn’t like a particular commenter, scroll down.”

    If you have to call people “idiots”, “trolls”, “teabaggers”, use obscenity, etc – go post on 4chan.

    Or accept that some people will vote your posts down just for the incivility in them.

  • Bill Perdue

    @B: Of course he’s not complaining. You make him sound almost reason able. But this proves otherwise; “Keep heckling the President GetEqual. LGBTeaBaggers.”

    Your comments just prove that you have an ambulance chaser mentality that pushes you to defend anyone, even Obama and AndrewW.

  • AndrewW

    @B: Your description of my comment is accurate. Bill Perdue (and others) are full of anger. They believe protesting produces results, but they have no recent evidence. They site historical examples that don’t even match our circumstance or the world we live in.

    Accountability is the issue. I get thumbed down because I suggest we NEED accountability for all tactics, strategies and organizations. Those who believe in protest reject accountability because they never demonstrate how these actions HELP us.

    My original comment:

    John Aravosis’ “Don’t Ask, Don’t Give” boycott of the DNC didn’t accomplish anything. Just like GetEqual’s stunts to embarrass the President, Speaker and a Committee Chairman – all not helpful.

    Pissing on our fiends may get a few headlines, but it won’t get us any support.

    We’re smarter than this.


  • B

    No. 61 · Bill Perdue dissembles some more by writing, “@B: Of course he’s not complaining. You make him sound almost reason able. But this proves otherwise; ‘Keep heckling the President GetEqual. LGBTeaBaggers.'”

    The reality – AndrewW’s first post was in fact reasonable (as his own words that I quoted showed), even though others might disagree with him – his comment was about tactics and strategy, not goals. Then you and some others dumped on him and he got a bit angry (understandably), but nowhere as angry as you get.

    So, you guys bait him and then you quote his response to the baiting and ignore any reasonable statement he made. It sounds to me that you want the rules to be that you can insult people to your heart’s content and nobody should respond in kind.

  • Rob Moore

    This is all rubbish anyway. Just as black Americans didn’t make much progress until there was some public violence, neither will there be much for us. Either we need to take the route of peaceful civil disobedience and accept the risk of some of us getting hurt when bigots attack us (Salem, Alabama) or we lob some bricks through some plate glass windows at both parties’ headquarters (Watts in Los Angeles, California). Being polite and reasonable allows others to wait us out. There are no measurable consequences for their inaction and vilification.

Comments are closed.