Rep. Patricia Todd responds to Alabama Democratic Party Chair Joe Turnham

As reported earlier this week, Alabama Democratic Party Chair Joe Turnham responded to attacks against DNC Chair Howard Dean by the head of the Alabama GOP with comments that amounted to gay-baiting (see here and here).

State Representative Patricia Todd, Alabama's only out elected public official, has written this thoughtful and direct letter to Mr. Turnham expressing concern about his comments:

Joe:

I am writing to express my concern about your comments regarding gay marriage during Gov. Dean's visit to Alabama. As you can image, I have received numerous emails about the comment and many LBGT and our supporters are angered by implying that our civil right to marry is NOT supported by the Democratic Party.

These sort of "off the cuff" remarks are harmful to our ability to recruit progressive thinkers to our party base and also hurts Stonewall's ability to raise money for the party and our candidates.

You and I have had numerous conversations regarding my frustration with the party trying to out maneuver the Republicans on social issues. I understand the need for a "moderate" approach in Alabama, but is it really worth bashing a group of supporters to look more conservative? Why even respond to Rep. Hubbard's remarks at all? The Republican Chair's remarks were so reactionary that they needed no response. The Republicans are obviously threatened by Gov. Dean's visit.

I am a firm supporter of the Democratic Party and the issues we support nationally. I am willing to discuss this further at your convenience and stand ready to develop fair solutions to build a stronger party.

Sincerely,

Patricia Todd

Readers may continue to send polite but firm messages to Mr. Turnham about his comments here, and supportive messages to Rep. Todd here.

Since Mr. Turnham made his comments in the context of visits by Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean and presidential candidate John Edwards, messages may be sent to them asking that they disassociate themselves from Mr. Turnham's comments:
Howard Dean at the DNC
John Edwards campaign

Gay political feud over tainted Obama fundraiser

Today's Chicago Sun-Times tells of a nasty fight over one of Barack Obama's gay fundraisers, who was punished in recent months for ethics lapses regarding his stewardship of a trust fund benefiting young relatives.

Michael Bauer receiving Anti-Defamation
League award from Joe Biden

Michael Bauer, who has raised tens of thousands of dollars for Obama and who serves on the lesbian and gay advisory committee of the Senator's presidential campaign, is serving a nine-month suspension of his law license for looting a trust fund benefiting his brother's children. Several prominent Illinois LGBT activists want Obama to boot him as a fundraiser and as an advisor. Obama is so far standing by his $60,000 man, but the nieces and nephew still haven't received restitution for their missing money.

The missing amount is about $300,000, which, coincidentally, is about the amount that Bauer gave to political candidates during the same period that the money went missing. No word on whether Obama or the other beneficiaries of Bauer's political largesse will remit the money to the kids' trust fund.

Ex-prawn conversion therapy doesn't work

This is making the rounds on the internet this weekend:

One day two prawns were swimming around in the sea. One was called Justin and the other called Christian. The prawns were constantly being harassed and prawn-bashed by sharks.

Finally one day Justin said to Christian, "I'm fed up with being a prawn. I wish I was a shark, and then I wouldn't have any worries about being eaten."

A large mysterious cod appeared and said, "Your wish is granted." Lo and behold, Justin turned into a shark. Justin was overwhelmed with gratitude, and he begged the stranger to tell him his name. "Cod. Just one name, like Madonna and Cher", said the stranger, who then swam away.

Unfortunately, Christian was terrified by his friend's new appearance, and he also swam away, afraid of being eaten.

Time passed, and Justin found life as a shark boring and lonely. All his old friends swam away whenever he came close to them.

While swimming alone one day, he saw Cod again and he thought perhaps the mysterious fish could change him back into a prawn. He approached Cod and begged to be changed back; and lo and behold, he found himself turned back into a prawn.

Happy as a clam, Justin swam back to find his old friends. Arrivng at his old reef, he asked the closest fish, "Where's Christian?"

"He's at home, still distraught that his best friend changed sides and became a shark", came the reply.

Eager to put things right again and end their estrangement, he set off to Christian's abode. He banged on the door and shouted: "Christian, it's me, your old friend Justin. Come out and see me again."

Christian replied, "No way man, you'll eat me. You're a shark now, and I won't be tricked into being your dinner."

Justin cried back, "No, I'm not. I've changed. I've found Cod. I'm a prawn again, Christian."

More anti-gay rhetoric from Alabama Democrats Chair

When Alabama Democratic Party Chair Joe Turnham spoke to a reporter for this morning's Montgomery Advertiser about Republican candidates' views on gay marriage, he wasn't some politican who suddenly had a microphone shoved in his face and who said something dumb without having had time to think first. Gay marriage is something that Mr. Turnham has been thinking about lately. And he doesn't like it.

In an official state party Message from the Chairman, Mr. Turnham responds to Republican "red meat" attacks with much standard Democratic boilerplate, but he then throws in some gay bashing to play to the good old boy vote. His message is reproduced in its entirety below; the cringe-causing typos, sentence fragments, sentence run-ons, and tortured syntax are all his:

CHAIRMAN TURNHAM WELCOMES JOHN EDWARDS AND CHAIRMAN DEAN TO ALABAMA ON SAME DAY, REBUKES 'DIVIDE AND CONQUER' REPUB CHAIR

5/24/2007

http://algop.org/News/Read.aspx?ID=5030

Joe Turnham

see Repub press release here...as long as they refer to the Democratic Party as the 'Democrat' Party, they should be refered to as the 'Repub' Party.

It might be the lingering Lee Atwater, Ralph Reed or maybe Karl Rove influence, but Alabama Republicans can't resist what they term as 'raw meat' moments to bash national Democratic visitors when they come to Alabama.

After Alabama Repubs have filibustered 27 straight legislative days away and after the Repub Party has welcomed 'pro-abortion, pro-gay, anti-gun' Rudy and Mitt to Alabama...what do they do but pull that same 'old play card' on us today...never mind the deficits (trade and budget), Iraq, Drought, Gas Prices...

Notice in their press release is no praise of former ALGOP Saint George Bush and his now 42% Alabama job approval rating or the 58% majority of Alabamians who agree with Howard Dean and John Edwards about setting withdrawal timetables for the war in Iraq, but only Repub trite and old stereotype politics of characterization.

A recent party ID poll in Alabama shows that by a margin of 42 to 38 percent more Alabama voters identify themselves as Democrats verses Republican. Two thirds of Alabama voters deem global warming to be a serious problem that ALGOP and George Bush deny.

While Lt. Gov Folsom overrode Repub and Riley efforts to end the legislative session, budgets, local bills are now moving in the Alabama Senate.

Both Senator Edwards and previosly Senator's Obama, Clinton and Dodd have challenged Alabama Democrats to solve problems and tackle the issues of the day that may define our survival as a human race. That challenge should surpass petty and mean-spirited press releases.

DNC Chair Howard Dean even challenged Democrats today to reach out to Republicans to hear their ideas, and offered ethics reform, accountability in governments as central to our party. Can ALGOP challenge those notions?

As our crops burn, Iraq explodes, gas prices rise, more homes are foreclosed, and 50 million unisured Americans read about the 17 seasonal hurrricanes/ tropical storm predictions of global warming...can' t Alabama Repubs even pretend to have a debate about our future?

Our party is not perfect nor is it broken. It is full of national and local democrats who give of their lives, fortunes and minds to solve problems and seize opportunity that can move Alabama forward. I welcome these national dems to Alabama and rebuke the character assassination launched ALGOP using methods of old that have damaged our state, nation and world.

Survival, peace and prosperity rest upon a collaborative effort by the imperfect of us all to affect change, hope and cheer in the hearts of all people.

Joe

Polite but firm messages may be sent to Alabama Democratic Chair Joe Turnham about his gay baiting here.

Since Mr. Turnham made his comments in the context of visits by Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean and presidential candidate John Edwards, messages may be sent to them asking that they disassociate themselves from Mr. Turnham's comments:
Howard Dean at the DNC
John Edwards campaign

It might also be useful to send a supportive note to Democratic state Representative Patricia Todd, Alabama's only out elected official, here.

Alabama Democrats Chair slams gay marriage

In this morning's Montgomery Advertiser, Alabama Democratic Party Chair Joe Turnham responds to attacks by his GOP counterpart by slamming gay marriage.

Referring to a visit to Alabama by Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean, Alabama Republican Party Chair Mike Hubbard had said:

"Every time Howard Dean opens his mouth in Alabama, it makes our state Republican Party stronger and recruits more members to our conservative cause....I encourage him to visit our state often and share his left-wing agenda with the citizens of Alabama."

In response, Mr. Turnham said that Mr. Hubbard didn't have any room to criticize, given what Mr. Turnham believes are the positions of some GOP presidential candidates:

"He has gun control in New York with Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney with gay marriage in Massachusetts....He shouldn't be taking shots at Howard Dean."

Billy Jack Gaither

Even if Mr. Romney did support gay marriage (he opposes it), Mr. Turnham's swipe at a political figure for such putative support is noxious gay-baiting deep in the heart of Dixie. Let's hope that Mr. Turnham won't need another horrific Alabama anti-gay murder like that of Billy Jack Gaither in 1999 to remind him of the consequences of homophobia.

Democratic Senate fundraising doubles GOP's

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) continued to bring in twice as much money as its GOP counterpart in April, according to The Hill.

Transcript and video: Laura Richardson at 01 Jun 2004 Long Beach city council meeting

Below are the video and transcript of remarks made by then-Councilmember Laura Richardson at the 01 Jun 2004 Long Beach city council meeting regarding a resolution to oppose the anti-gay federal marriage amendment. The resolution was introduced by then-Councilmember Dan Baker, an openly gay Democrat. Richardson voted against the resolution, helping to defeat it on a 4-4 tie vote. She is now running against state Senator Jenny Oropeza for the Democratic nomination for Congress to succeed Juanita Millender-McDonald, who passed away last month.

Richardson's remarks are rambling almost to the point of incoherence, but she manages to make several points clear:

♦ she was sick and had originally planned to be absent from the council meeting, but she rose from her sickbed expressly to vote on this resolution, which she helped to defeat;

♦ she asserted that she is a born-again Christian, and that she struggled her entire time on the council with the conflict between her private views and her public responsibilities; and

♦ she asserted that she is "the product of a bi-racial marriage", which was illegal in many states; and yet she feels no qualms about voting to "preserve what a definition of marriage means".

Richardson was sharply criticized for homophobic campaign literature that she used when she was running for a state Assembly seat against Gerrie Schipske in 1996. Schipske, an openly lesbian Democrat who is now a member of the Long Beach city council, defeated Richardson. Some of Richardson's supporters are now trying to claim that the incident is in the distant past and that she is no longer homphobic; but this vote and these comments, which are easily found on the internet, were made a little over a thousand days ago. Memory sometimes fails, but Google is forever.

Richardson speaks for seven minutes, starting when the time clock on the media player says 4hrs 09min here . One can move the Seek button to that point rather than wait through the entire video.

One may read her remarks as the video plays:

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR.

BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU ASK FOR.
WHEN THIS ISSUE WAS BROUGHT
FORWARD LAST WEEK, I HAD SAID
THAT I WAS GOING TO BE SICK ON
TUESDAY, AND BE AT HOME, AND
HERE I AM SICK, BUT I’M HERE.
AND I’M HERE BECAUSE THIS IS
WHAT WE’RE HERE TO DO.
WE’RE HERE TO DEAL WITH THE
GOOD ISSUES AND, UNFORTUNATELY,
SOME OF THE VERY TOUGH AND
DIFFICULT ISSUES THAT FACES
THIS COUNCIL.

I’D LIKE TO KIND OF STEP BACK A
LITTLE BIT IN TIME AND BRING A
LITTLE HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
VERY BRIEFLY HERE, AND THEN I
HOPE -- I THINK WE MIGHT
ACTUALLY BE IN THE PROCESS OF
CREATING SOMETHING THAT WE CAN
LIVE WITH THAT CAN ADDRESS, I
THINK, BOTH ISSUES THAT HAVE
BEEN TALKED ABOUT THIS EVENING
AND STILL HAVE SOME WHOLENESS
IN OUR COMMUNITY, WHICH IS WHAT
I’M CONCERNED ABOUT.

I AM THE PRODUCT OF A BI-
RACIAL MARRIAGE.
THERE WAS A TIME AND A PERIOD
WHEN MANY PEOPLE FELT THAT THAT
WAS SOMETHING THAT THAT WAS ILLEGAL.
IN FACT, IT WAS ILLEGAL IN MANY
STATES.

AND SOME PEOPLE FELT THAT
SOMEONE LIKE ME WAS
INSIGNIFICANT, THAT MY BRAIN
WASN’T AS GOOD BECAUSE IT HAD A
LITTLE BIT MORE OF ONE DROP OF
SOMETHING THAN SOMETHING ELSE.

AND SO EVEN THOUGH I COME FROM --
I WAS BORN AND RAISED FROM A
RELIGIOUS BACKGROUND, I BECAME
A BORN-AGAIN CHRISTIAN WHEN I WAS 14.
EVEN WITH ALL OF THAT, I ALSO
KNOW THAT WITH YOUR FAITH,
THERE IS ALSO A JOB THAT WE
HAVE TO DO HERE WHICH HAS TO DO
WITH PUBLIC POLICY AND WITH
LAW.

AND I THINK ONE OF THE BIGGEST
THINGS THAT I HAVE HAD TO
STRUGGLE WITH IN MY NOW FOUR
YEARS OF BEING A COUNCILMEMBER
IS WHEN SOMETIMES, WHAT HAPPENS
WHEN YOUR PERSONAL PERSPECTIVE
MIGHT BE IN CONFLICT WITH WHAT
YOU FEEL IS BY LAW OR BY PUBLIC
POLICY WHAT IS THE RIGHT THING
TO DO?

I WANT TO BRING SOMETHING ELSE
ALSO TO YOUR ATTENTION.
THIS COUNTRY — WELL, NOT
NECESSARILY THE COUNTRY, BUT
THIS STATE -- WAS DIVIDED BY
PROPOSITION 187.
AND YOU KNOW WHAT,
I THINK WHEN IT’S ALL SAID AND
DONE, SOMEBODY OVER THERE IS
LAUGHING AT ALL OF US, BECAUSE
YOU’VE GOT -- I SIT HERE AND IT
REALLY GRIEVES MY SPIRIT TO SEE
THE YOUNG PEOPLE SITTING HERE
LISTENING TO SOME OF THIS,
LISTENING TO SOME OF THE
LAUGHS, LISTENING TO SOME OF
THE COMMENTS.
AND I WOULD JUST URGE ALL OF
US TO REMEMBER, LOOK BACK ON SOME
OF THE MOVIES THAT YOU’VE SEEN.
LOOK AT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT
WHEN YOUNG PEOPLE WERE TAUGHT
CERTAIN PERSPECTIVES AND
CERTAIN IDEAS AND WHAT WERE
THE RESULTS AS THEY GREW UP AND
SOME OF THAT HATE WAS BUILT
WITHIN THEM.

IN PROPOSITION 187, THAT WAS
BROUGHT FORWARD TO SAY THAT
HEALTH BENEFITS SHOULD NOT BE
PROVIDED TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.
AND THAT PASSED RESOUNDINGLY IN
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
BUT WHAT HAPPENED WAS THE
COURTS FOUND THAT THAT WAS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

AND AGAIN, I THINK SOMETIMES
WE’RE GOING TO FIND OURSELVES
WHERE OUR PERSONAL BELIEFS MAY
NOT NECESSARILY MATCH UP WITH
APPROPRIATE PUBLIC POLICY.
WHEN I’VE LISTENED TONIGHT -- AND
I THOUGHT A LOT ABOUT WHAT WAS
GOING TO BE HAPPENING TODAY;
IN FACT, I’VE SPENT A LOT OF
TIME THINKING ABOUT IT OVER THE
LAST FIVE OR SIX DAYS -- AND I’VE
REALLY HEARD TWO DIFFERENT
THINGS. AND I WOULD VENTURE TO ASK YOU
TO PLEASE VENTURE WITH THIS
IDEA THAT I THINK THAT THESE
ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS HERE.

I HEARD ONE GROUP OF PEOPLE
TALK ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF
MARRIAGE AND WHAT MARRIAGE
MEANS AND WHAT IS THE
DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE.
BUT I DIDN’T HEAR OF, IF I’M NOT MISTAKEN,
I DIDN’T HEAR, OF ALL OF
THE PEOPLE WHO TALKED ABOUT WHY
THEY WANTED MARRIAGE TO STILL
BE WITH A MAN AND A WOMAN, I
DIDN’T HEAR ANY OF THOSE PEOPLE
SAY THAT THEY DIDN’T FEEL THAT
PEOPLE WHO MAY HAVE A SAME SEX
RELATIONSHIP DO NOT DESERVE
EQUAL RIGHTS, AND THAT’S WHERE
I THINK THAT SOMEBODY OVER
THERE IS LAUGHING AT ALL OF US.

AND IN THE SAME HAND, I DIDN’T
HEAR PEOPLE HERE WITH -- WHO ARE SAYING
THAT THEY WANTED THE RIGHTS
THAT WERE SAYING THAT THEY FELT
THAT MARRIAGE WAS ONLY THIS ONE
WAY.

AND SO FOR ME, I’M KIND OF
CAUGHT IN A QUANDARY, BECAUSE I
PERSONALLY HAVE A PERSPECTIVE,
BUT I ALSO HAVE A PROFESSIONAL,
AND I THINK A JOB TO DO.
AND SO WHAT I’VE ASKED MY
COLLEAGUES, I BELIEVE,
COUNCILMEMBER -- VICE MAYOR --
COLONNA PUT FORWARD A
SUBSTITUTE MOTION. I WOULD
SUPPORT HIS SUBSTITUTE MOTION
IF HE WOULD ACCEPT A FRIENDLY
AMENDMENT THAT WOULD SAY WE NOT
ONLY SUPPORT, WE SUPPORT LAWS
THAT COME FORWARD THAT
SUPPORT THE RIGHTS OF EVERYONE BUT WE
WOULD ALSO OPPOSE ANY LAWS THAT
WOULD PROHIBIT THE RIGHTS OF
ANYONE. [Note: Vice Mayor Frank Colonna had
offered a vague substitute motion to support
constitutional amendments that guaranteed
citizens' rights, making no mention of the federal
marriage amendment. --LB]

AND NOTICE THE WORDS “THE
RIGHTS OF ANYONE”.
AND I THINK THAT’S ULTIMATELY
WHAT WE’RE TALKING ABOUT HERE
TONIGHT.

I’M VERY CONCERNED THAT WHEN WE
WALK OUT OF HERE I SEE A LOT OF
PEOPLE -- AND SOMEONE MENTIONED
OF ALL THE ISSUES WE HAVE
FACING THIS COUNCIL, WHY AREN’T
ALL THESE PEOPLE HERE WHEN
WE’RE TALKING ABOUT THAT WE’RE
GOING TO CLOSE LIBRARIES ONE
DAY A WEEK. AND I JUST -- I STRUGGLE
WITH THAT, BECAUSE THAT’S WHAT THIS
COUNCIL IS ABOUT. THIS COUNCIL IS
ABOUT PROVIDING THE BEST SERVICES
FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

AND SO I’M STRUGGLING UP HERE,
AS MANY OF YOU ARE.
I WOULD URGE YOU -- I’M REALLY
DISAPPOINTED WITH SOME OF THE
THINGS THAT I’VE HEARD SAID,
AND I JUST HOPE THAT WE CAN
WALK AWAY TONIGHT WITH BEING
ABLE TO BUILD A BETTER LONG
BEACH AND US WORK TOGETHER AND
NOT SPENDING 99% OF THE TIME
TALKING ABOUT THE 1% OF WHAT WE
DON’T AGREE UPON.

SO I’M GOING TO DO MY BEST IN
THIS VOTE. I’M PRAYING THAT IT’S GOING TO
COME UP WITH THE FRIENDLY
AMENDMENT THAT I HAVE SUGGESTED
TO VICE MAYOR COLONNA, AND I
HOPE THAT WITH THAT, WE CAN
WORK ON THE NEXT STEPS.

THE LAST THING I WOULD JUST SAY
IS THAT OF THE TWO BILLS THAT
COUNCILMEMBER BAKER SHARED WITH
ME, THEY ARE IN COMMITTEE. [Note: This is a
reference to the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House
versions of the federal marriage amendment. --LB]
I DID CONTACT TO SHOW, TO TALK ABOUT THE
STRUGGLE OF THIS WHOLE ISSUE, I
CONTACTED MY CONGRESSPERSON,
BECAUSE THAT’S WHO THIS IS
COMING TO, AND MY CONGRESSPERSON
SAID THAT THIS IS NOT
COMING BEFORE A VOTE OF THE
CONGRESS THIS YEAR. [Note: A motion to invoke
cloture was voted on in the U.S. Senate only 33 days later, on 14 Jul 2004 -- which was also Nate's and my one-year wedding anniversary. Memory will never fail me on this one. --LB]
SO I THINK THAT THERE IS A LOT OF WORK THAT
NEEDS TO BE DONE.

I BELIEVE -- I AM THE OPTIMIST THAT BELIEVES
THAT WE CAN PROTECT THE RIGHTS
OF PEOPLE AND YET PRESERVE
WHAT A DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE
MEANS.

SO I LOOK FORWARD TO HOPEFULLY US
COMING TOGETHER AND BUILDING
A BETTER LONG BEACH.

THANK YOU.

Video and minutes of 01 Jun 2004 Long Beach council meeting

Here are links to the video and the minutes of the segment of the 01 Jun 2004 Long Beach city council meeting that dealt with the resolution by then-Councilmember Dan Baker to oppose the federal marriage amendment. Baker is an openly gay Democrat. The resolution, Agenda Item 22, failed on a vote of 4-4.

Then-Councilmember Laura Richardson voted against the resolution. She is now running against pro-LGBT state Senator Jenny Oropeza for the Democratic nomination for Congress to succeed Congresswoman Juanita Millender-McDonald in the 26 Jun 2007 primary election. Richardson was sharply criticized over a decade ago for using homophobic litrature in her 1996 state Assembly campaign against Gerrie Schipske, an openly lesbian Democrat. Schipske defeated Richardson in that contest. Supporters of Richardson's are now trying to claim that she is not homophobic.

From the minutes of the Long Beach City Council meeting, 01 Jun 2004

22. Resolution opposing Federal Marriage Amendment (H.J. Res. 56 and S.J. Res. 26).

Action: Request City Attorney to prepare a resolution opposing the Federal Marriage Amendment (H.J. Res. 56 & S.J. Res. 26).

Lerch moved to receive and file, seconded by Webb

Reverend James Shaw spoke in opposition.
Trip Hoefield spoke in favor.
Albert Demalis spoke in opposition.
Linda Alexander spoke in favor.
Pastor Michael Elay spoke in opposition.
Pastor Michael Cole spoke in favor.
Davey Cop spoke in opposition.
Elisa Maconahy spoke in favor.
Pastor Garon Harden spoke in opposition.
Diana Lejin spoke in favor.
Joe Esposito spoke in opposition.
Evan O'Grady spoke in support.
Pastor David Smith in opposition.
Whitney Uldman spoke in favor.
Jillian Eastman spoke in opposition.
Barbara Smith and Jacob Bedina spoke in favor.
Johnny Esposito spoke in opposition.
Joy spoke in favor.
Pastor John Wilkerson spoke in opposition.
Julia Curtis Steel spoke in support.

Motion: Amend the substitute motion and request the City Attorney to prepare a Resolution opposing the Federal Marriage Amendment (H.J. Res. 56 and S.J. Res. 26).
Moved by Baker, seconded by Lowenthal.

Substitution motion moved by Vice Mayor Colonna, seconded by Carroll, to support only those changes or amendments for our Constitution that guarantees the right of all men, women, and children to equal protection under the law.

Motion: Amend Substitution motion moved by Colonna, seconded by Carroll, to prepare resolution to support only those changes or amendments for our Constitution that guarantees the right of all men, women, and children to equal protection under the law and oppose amendments that would deny equal protection under the law.
Moved by Colonna, seconded by Carroll.

Motion: receive and file the item.
Moved by Lerch, seconded by Webb.

Richardson aked that Vice Mayor Colonna accept a friendly amendment to support equality for everyone as long as it support equal rights for everyone.

Colonna motion Voted 7/1 Lerch in opposition.

Vote 4/4 on Baker motion. Lowenthal, Baker, Reyes Uranga, Carroll - yes [emphasis added -- LB]

Vote: Motion carried 5-3.
Yes: Colonna; Carroll; Richardson; Webb; Lerch
No: Lowenthal; Baker; Reyes Uranga
Absent: Kell

Mayor declared 5 minute break.

Lowenthal left the meeting at 10:43 p.m.

Barney Frank in a sling

He hurt his arm at the gym. See the Washington Post.

Ohio Democratic Governor signs non-discrimination order

Ohio Democratic Governor Ted Strickland today signed an executive order banning discrimination of current or prospective state employees on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity:

Executive Order 2007 – 10S
Establishing Policy Against Discrimination
Based on Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity

1. The State of Ohio Should Treat Employees Respectfully. Persons employed by the State of Ohio are a vital part of creating and fostering efficient governmental practices and ensuring that all citizens of Ohio receive the support and services that they need and to which they are entitled. Because of the contributions that State employees make, their colleagues and supervisors should treat them with respect and dignity.

2. The State of Ohio Should Seek to Attract Top Quality Employees. The government must compete for the best employees it can obtain. Discriminatory conduct in hiring and other employment related decisions undermines the State’s ability to attract and retain the best possible employees.

3. State and Federal Law Already Prohibit a Range of Discriminatory Practices. Ohio law, consistent with federal law, prohibits employers, including the State, from discriminating in employment decisions on the basis of race, color, religion, national original, veteran status, disability, age, or sex. However, there are no such laws that prohibit employers from discriminating in employment related decisions on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

4. Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Discrimination is Currently Occurring in State Government. Information compiled by the Ohio Civil Rights Commission documents ongoing and past discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and/or gender identity in employment-related decisions by personnel at Ohio agencies, boards and commissions. Such discriminatory conduct undermines the effectiveness of employees discriminated against, prevents the State from attracting the best available talent to work on behalf of the people of Ohio, and offends basic notions of human dignity.

5. Applicable Definitions. The following definitions apply to the requirements of this Order:

a. Sexual Orientation: A person’s actual or perceived homosexuality; bisexuality; or heterosexuality, by orientation or practice, by and between adults who have the ability to give consent.

b. Gender Identity: The gender a person associates with him or herself, regardless of the gender others might attribute to that person.

6. Prohibition Against Discrimination. For the reasons stated above, I am declaring it to be the policy of the State of Ohio that no person employed by a Cabinet agency or by a State of Ohio Board or Commission may discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity in making any of the following employment related decisions:

a. Hiring

b. Layoff

c. Termination

d. Transfer

e. Promotion

f. Demotion

g. Rate of Compensation

h. Eligibility for In-Service Training Programs

7. Management of Discrimination Complaints. Any person who believes that an agency, board, or commission employee has discriminated against him or her in violation of this Order may file a discrimination complaint with the Equal Opportunity Division/Equal Employment Opportunity Section of the Ohio Department of Administrative Services. All such complaints will be investigated and resolved within the timeframe allowed for claims of discrimination that are recognized by Ohio law. Persons engaging in discrimination in violation of this order will be subject to discipline commensurate with the sanctions that would be applied to illegal discriminatory conduct.

8. I signed this Executive Order on May 17, 2007 in Columbus, Ohio and it will expire on my last day as Governor of Ohio unless rescinded before then.

Video: Rep. John Lewis on hate crimes bill

John Lewis is a giant in the civil rights movement, with scars from the Selma marches to prove it. He spoke at the 1963 March on Washington minutes before Dr. King gave his I Have a Dream speech. He has represented Georgia's fifth congressional district since 1987.

He wasn't afraid of racist police with clubs, and he's not afraid to say the words "gay" and "transgender" on the floor of the United States House of Representatives.

McCain on Falwell, 2000 and 2007

Jerry Falwell died earlier today. Compare and contrast statements made about Mr. Falwell in 2000 by GOP Presidential candidate John McCain versus Mr. McCain's statement today:

2000: Those like Jerry Falwell who "practice [division and slander] in the name of religion or in the name of the Republican Party or in the name of America shame our faith, our party and our country....Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance." Falwell is among the "people who have turned good causes into businesses."

2007: "Dr. Falwell was a man of distinguished accomplishment who devoted his life to serving his faith and country."

Fundraising dries up for GOP closet case Dreier

The Los Angeles Daily News is reporting that fundraising for California GOP closet case Congressman Dave Dreier (CA-26) is drying up.

Dreier pulled in less than $27,000 over the last two quarters, and Democrats see his seat as vulnerable in next year's elections.

Dreier's sexual orientation notwithstanding, he has been a loyal Republican when it comes to voting against the LGBT community. His HRC congressional scores have been dismal, averaging 18 over seven Congresses:

2006 (109th Congress) 38
2004 (108th Congress) 22
2002 (107th Congress) 17
2000 (106th Congress) 10
1998 (105th Congress) 25
1996 (104th Congress) 00
1994 (103rd Congress) 14

Dreier's antipathy for the LGBT community has been so extreme that he has repeatedly voted against or refused to sponsor the hate crimes bill, civil unions for D.C. citizens, immigration equity for same-sex families, and gays in the military. He will not even institute a non-discrimination policy encompassing sexual orientation for his own congressional office.

In the September 2005 Republican House leadership shakeup that resulted when indicted Majority Leader Tom Delay stepped down, Dreier was tapped by then-Speaker Dennis Hastert to replace Delay. Conservatives in the caucus revolted against this decision after the blogosphere speculated widely on the prospect of a heavily closeted gay man being Number 2 in the GOP's House hierarchy. Dreier's candidacy evaporated, and John Boehner of Ohio was eventually chosen for the position.

Don't ask about Don't Ask

As Bush prepares to reappoint Peter Pace to head the Joint Chiefs, the Army is trying all sorts of incentives to keep its officers from running away. Repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell apparently is not among those incentives.

Pope criticizes "age so full of hedonism"

Pope Benedict XVI, speaking at the canonization of a Brazilian saint, decried an "age so full of hedonism". It is not clear if he was wearing his Prada ruby slippers or his Gucci shades when he said this.

Bush likely to reappoint Pace to Joint Chiefs

The New York Times is reporting that Bush is expected to reappoint General Peter Pace to head the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Pace is the U.S. armed forces chief strategic manager who stated in March that he thinks that homosexuality is immoral. It might be suggested that his attentions are more in need in Iraq.

"Bush Expected to Renew Term of Chairman of Joint Chiefs"

By DAVID S. CLOUD
Published: May 11, 2007

WASHINGTON, May 10 — President Bush is expected to nominate Gen. Peter Pace of the Marines for a second term as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, opting for continuity during a critical phase in the Iraq conflict, two Defense Department officials said on Thursday....

In March, he caused debate when he said that he believed homosexual conduct to be immoral, a remark that he later was forced to acknowledge he should not have made. Rather than expressing his personal views, he said, he should have focused on his support for a current Pentagon policy that prohibits openly gay people from serving in the armed forces.

A nomination to a second term would require that General Pace be confirmed by the Senate....

Blair, about to step down, looks back on U.K. lesbian and gay progress

U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair announced today that he will step down 27 Jun 2007. In a valedictory address that he gave before a Stonewall Equality gathering in March, he reviewed progress for U.K. lesbians and gays under his government:

22 March 2007

Prime Minister:

Thank you very much, thank you. Thank you very much indeed. It is a real honour to be with you here this evening at the Stonewall Equality Dinner and to say thank you to Ben for that kind introduction.

Just before I came here tonight, and this is probably a sad reflection on the type of thing you do as you end your time in office, I actually got out one of my old speeches and re-read it. It was a speech back in 1994 on an amendment by Edwina Currie and Neil Kinnock [a well-known Conservative M.P. and a well-known Labour M.P., respectively --LB], interestingly enough, it wasn't a combination that was often found, but they came together to move an amendment on the equality of the age of consent. And the thing that really struck me, re-reading the speech this evening, was just how a whole lot of things that nowadays we would more or less take for granted, you had to start literally from the very first principles, including arguments like: "how do you stop people being persuaded to be gay?" And I was thinking that is an interesting idea. I have got five really good arguments in favour of being gay. And I remember saying to the guy who was on the opposite side afterwards: "You know, I am not gay and I wouldn't be persuaded by five really good arguments." And he said to me: "No, no, of course not, of course not." And I said: "But maybe it is the same the other way round?" He had never thought of it like that at all obviously.

But the interesting thing is that you then fast-forward to last night in the House of Lords and the fact is the vote was won, which is an incredible thing. [The Lords upheld the U.K.'s new Sexual Orientation Regulations anti-discrimination law, which included gay adoption rights without an exemption for church-affiliated adoption agencies. --LB]

And I really just wanted to say two things about the changes that have happened over the past ten years, which you will know very well. And there were a lot of important things, but I think the civil partnership is really the thing that, as I was saying to people earlier, it is a thing that doesn't just give me a lot of pride, but it actually brought real joy. I don't know whether you remember the very first day, and I don't by what bizarre circumstance, the first set of ceremonies were actually in Northern Ireland, but it was just, sort of just so alive, and I was so struck by it. I remember seeing the pictures on television, and it is not often you do a little sort of skip around in my job - I can assure you. But it really the fact that that the people were so happy and the fact that you felt just one major, major change had happened, of which everyone can feel really proud. And now I think we were just saying, was it 16,000 civil partnerships, and what is interesting now is that other countries in Europe are looking at this legislation, and it is very divisive still in Spain and Italy at the moment. But nonetheless it is happening.

The fascinating thing, and this is my second reflection about it all, because you know all the different pieces of legislation and so on, and there is no point in rehearsing them, but what has happened is that the culture of the country has changed in a definable way as a result of it. And here is what I think is really interesting, that the change in the culture and the civilising effect of it has gone far greater than the gay and lesbian community.

In other words, by taking a stand on this issue and by removing a piece of prejudice and discrimination, and by enabling people to stand proud as what they are, it has had an impact that I think profoundly affects the way the country thinks about itself. And I like to think of Britain as a country with an immensely proud history, but it is able today to stand on its own merits and look at the 21st century and say, we have got a great future.

And the one thing that I think is really important about any country that will succeed in the future is that you make the most of the talents and abilities of your people, and if you allow discrimination to fester, that is the complete rejection of that modernising and civilising notion of making the most ... [APPLAUSE]

So that is what has been important about it, and it is why as the day approaches, I mean even I get casual about this legacy business - well I think it is actually part of the last ten years - that certainly I will look back on with a lot of pride.

However, there is one final thing I wanted to say, which is this: it wouldn't have happened without you. I mean some people have been very kind in saying that it took a certain amount of political courage. Well yes it did, but you know I remember back in the early '80s when this type of issue was condemned as political correctness, when this was the loony-left, as it were, engaged in this. Stonewall in my view played a fundamental and often insufficiently recognised part in achieving this.

And I want to tell you why. Because when you are trying to do something that is difficult, divisive, and to be honest about it, as a politician you are doing something that you know is going to be very controversial, you know it is all very well, you say we are going to do this, and you can see some of your people are absolutely up for it, and some of your people are thinking mmm.

And you know what actually matters enormously is that the people from the outside of politics that you are trying to do it with have a sufficient intelligence and sensitivity and what I call, which is really how I define the Stonewall campaigning, I define it as a polite determination. In other words there was a complete you know push and drive to get the thing done, but also a way of doing it that was always looking to bring people on-side, that was always looking to understand sensitivities, that was always looking to say look this is something you know we would like to help get done with you in a sensible and intelligent way. And what Stonewall did, and Angela Mason, who I thought was absolutely fantastic when she was the Head, and now Ben what they did was remarkable and it is a real tribute.

And you seen here we are this evening at the Stonewall Equality Dinner, and the interesting thing is that a lot of the tables from some of the best known names in business and commerce, and this is part of the diversity agenda now of these big companies, and all of that is fantastic. Sometimes people have said to me "well now that all the political parties are in favour of this, you know there is going to be greater competition for the so-called gay and lesbian vote." And I say actually it is a fantastic thing that all the party leaders today, and in the future actually all of them will be, I think, in favour of equality, and that is a sign of how much things have changed and we shouldn't be worried about that, whatever political party we are in, we should be actually glad of it, because it is a great achievement for our country.

So anyway I just wanted to say this evening how deeply grateful I am for what I regard as a real honour in coming along and being able to address these words to you at the start of your dinner tonight. And I would like to thank each and every one of you for participating in the dinner, for helping, you know this has been a good fund-raiser for Stonewall and it will be an important signal that this is part of the mainstream part of our society today and that progress actually does come about, and it comes about because people are determined when they see injustice, to correct it. And that is what you have done through Stonewall, and we have played our part in that.

But I want to say to a lot of people who have been very kind tonight, and said thank you to me, but I want to say thank you to you, because we couldn't have done it without you. And when I do look back on it, with pride, I think I should acknowledge rightly that the pride and the honour is shared with you.

Thank you very much.

Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski statement on civil unions, ENDA bills

Oregon Democratic Governor Ted Kulongoski made the following statement at yesterday's signing ceremony for the state's civil unions and employment non-discrimination act (ENDA) bills:

Remarks by Governor Kulongoski

May 9, 2007

HB 2007 and SB 2 Signing Ceremony

Good Morning. Today is truly a historic day for Oregon.

I look out at you in the crowd – and at those standing with me today – and I see the faces of my friends, my colleagues and my fellow Oregonians who, like me, have been fighting for this day for more than thirty years.

This has been a long road traveled. It has taken patience. It has taken perseverance. It has taken our will to never give up on the dream of hope and opportunity for all Oregonians.

And today, we can deliver that dream by ending legal discrimination once and for all against gays and lesbians in Oregon – and by extending protections and legal recognition for same-sex couples and their families.

I started this legislative session declaring that this is the session of opportunity. That this is the session where we will succeed in affording all Oregonians the same rights and protections under the law. And that this is the session where we will formally recognize that diversity and equality of opportunity makes us all stronger – not weaker.

I don’t get to say this as much as I like to, but I couldn’t be more proud to stand before you today and say, "I was right!"

This is the session where we have succeeded in upholding the values and principles of Oregon – that we are all created equal and that Oregon is a land of equal opportunity for all of our citizens.

This is the session where we’re breaking down barriers to all Oregon families to live and love – play and succeed – work and contribute to one Oregon – to a better Oregon.

I only have the greatest respect for our legislators – of both parties – and their commitment to their constituents in their committee work and their work to make the best decisions on behalf of what’s best for Oregon. But if you look at the majority of the bills that pass each session, they are what I call transactional.

However, every decade or so there are a few bills that are actually transformational – and House Bill 2007 and Senate Bill 2 are two pieces of legislation that will literally transform our state from one of exclusion to one of complete inclusion.

And there are a lot of people here today who deserve credit for this transformation.

I’m looking out at many who took time out of their busy lives of work and family to spend hours on the phone, writing letters, educating the public and lobbying the legislature for these bills.

From my Task Force on Equality to individual Oregonians to organizations like Basic Rights Oregon to corporate partners like Nike – today is truly the result of a collective effort affirming that we really are one Oregon – with one common destiny.

But there are three special people here today that I want to recognize, thank and honor. They have been leaders in this movement and by my side in the struggle for basic fairness and equality for all Oregonians for more than thirty years – Gov. Barbara Roberts, Terry Bean and Don Powell.

First, though, I want to introduce two legislators who made this possible. While I like to think as Governor, I can make it happen on my own, the reality is that to be effective, I need strong partners in the legislature, to enact legislation like Senate Bill 2 and House Bill 2007.

So I’d like to ask my good friend, colleague and champion of gay rights, Senator Kate Brown to take the stage, followed by Speaker Merkley, who kept his promise to bring these two bills to the floor.

Now I’d like to recognize Governor Roberts – who has been fighting for equal rights of gays and lesbians as long as – if not longer than – all of us.

She stood up for equality before it was politically correct, politically popular or politically viable.

She broke ground on the road that got us to where we are today – and even after her time in public service, she never stopped paving the path to progress, and ultimately, full equality.

She is a great friend, a great mentor, a great leader – and a great Oregonian.

She represents the best of Oregon – past, present, and today, future – and it is with great honor to share this moment with her.

And now, Governor Barbara Roberts.

The next two speakers are good friends and good Oregonians who have been with me throughout my public career – starting back in Junction City.

We may not always agree, but we’ve remained friends and we’ve remained united in this fight to establish equality and fairness for all Oregonians.

My good friends, Terry Bean and Don Powell.

The next person is someone who answered my call last year and chaired my Task Force on Equality – taking on an ambitious mission with an aggressive timeline.

I charged the Task Force with analyzing current law and identifying changes necessary to guarantee that all Oregonians receive equal protection from discrimination regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

I also asked the Task Force to review states with domestic partnerships and to identify the path for Oregon to establish legal recognition of same-sex couples and their families.

The Task Force had diverse representation from the business community, faith community, education community, health care community, legal community and local governments.

The members dedicated hours of their personal time each month toward this cause – and in a short time frame, they delivered a report and recommendations to me in time for legislation to be introduced this session.

As a result of their commitment to creating a more equal and fair Oregon, these two bills were introduced and with their help in educating the public and the legislature – these two bills were passed with bi-partisan support.

So thank you, Paul and to the other 10 members of the Task Force who are here today. Your role was invaluable to achieving this historic moment.

I also want to thank Attorney General Hardy Myers and the Department of Justice, and Labor Commissioner Dan Gardner and BOLI for supporting the work of the task force and lending staff assistance to ensure the Task Force was able to carry out its mission.

With that, I’d like to turn the podium over to Paul Kelly, attorney and business leader, who served as the Chair of my Task Force on Equality.

Before we move on to the bill signing, there is one more person I’d like to recognize and give an opportunity to say a few words. He is new to Oregon – I believe he’s moved here within the last few weeks…But he is not new to the GLBT civil rights movement.

From Idaho, he was the first openly gay attorney in the state and has been a passionate leader and advocate for the GLBT community throughout the west for the last twenty years.

He is a proven leader and a welcome addition to Oregon, whom I look forward to working with in the coming years.

With that, I’d like to introduce John Hummel, Basic Rights Oregon’s new Executive Director.

Now let’s sign these bills into law!!!

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX-01) is afraid of transvestites

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX-01)
Originally uploaded by Leewah1.

Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-TX-01) addressed the pending hate crimes bill on the floor of the United States House of Representatives last Wednesday, 02 May 2007. The bill would add sexual orientation and gender identity to the existing federal hate crimes law. It was approved by the House the next day by 237-180.

Rep. Gohmert stated that part of his rationale for voting against the bill is that he is afraid of "numbers" of transvestites getting between him and his office, and that he might be charged with a crime if he pushed past them to get through. Really.

But don't take our word for it. Check the Congressional Record:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2007_record&page=H4413&position=all

Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, tomorrow this body will take up legislation that is referred to as hate crime legislation. On its face that sounds pretty innocuous, something we should all agree on. We are against hate....

Now, most hate crime laws refer to serious bodily injury, but not in this legislation. We refer to bodily injury. We have lowered the bar dramatically. There are some jurisdictions that would say bodily injury can be temporary, no matter how temporary. It can be a touching, a pushing.

So, in other words, if someone opposed to your position that, perhaps, was having gender identity issues, like a transvestite, got between you and your office, and there were numbers of them, and you tried to get through to your office, then, as has happened in other places, he may be inclined now to go to the Federal Government, file a criminal complaint for which you could be arrested, and that would be bodily injury sufficient to rise to that level....

Where are the DNC's LGBT consultants?

This article on Politico.com concerns the relationship of the Democratic National Committee with black consultants and how the DNC empowers them by steering business and access their way. The article is not LGBT-specific in and of itself, but it raises many questions about the DNC's relationship with the black community that apply as well to the LGBT community.

The article notes that $1.8 billion was spent on consulting during the 2004 election cycle. If 5%-10% had been spent on LGBT consulting firms, that would have been $90 million-$180 million.