Obama to speak at Human Rights Campaign Dinner Saturday

http://www.floridablade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=27490

Obama to speak at HRC Dinner
13th annual event to take place Saturday

By CHRIS JOHNSON, Washington Blade | Oct 5, 12:33 PM


President Obama will speak at the upcoming national dinner and fundraiser for the Human Rights Campaign, according to a report in the New York Times.

An HRC spokesperson didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Obama’s appearance wouldn’t be the first time that a sitting president appeared at the national HRC dinner. Former President Bill Clinton addressed the dinner in 1997.

The HRC dinner is scheduled for Saturday at the Washington Convention Center in D.C. More than 3,000 guests are expected, according to an HRC statement.

Also slated to make appearances are Judy and Dennis Shepard, the parents of Matthew Shepard, a gay college student who was killed near Laramie, Wyo., in 1998 because of his sexual orientation. Judy Shepard and Dennis Shepard are set to receive HRC’s first-ever Edward M. Kennedy National Leadership Award.

Other planned special guests include Lady Gaga; the cast of “Glee,” a new comedy on the Fox network; and Gavin Creel, a two-time Tony-nominated Broadway actor currently starring in “Hair.”

"Fighting" with Madonna one weekend, shaking hands with the President the next.

a voice.

..... at least you and I can agree on that. ;)

I like her live version of "Paparazzi" better than the recorded version .... I cant think of any other artist I've ever felt that way about.

but the girl has chops. And that's exactly what she is: an artist. I think she's the real deal and will be around for many moons.

Obama's deeds must match his lofty words, or else.

You'll suddenly turn anti-Obama?

Or else people that voted for HOPE in 2008 won't go to the polls in 2010.

they won't vote green. oh sure, a small number might. the vast majority won't. it's independents that make or break elections.

or 2012, as we did in 2008, if the people that voted for HOPE feel they were let down.

and who's "we"? Here's an opinion: You represent a tiny and insignificant number of people. thank dog.

Think of all the Wednesdays and weekends we wasted canvassing and calling people to get the vote out.

mean they agree with you. you're really pretty unusual.

which apparently have been ditched by the very politicians that depended on union support.

for Obama as you are- not that you ever did anything here but trash him in very ugly ways. I don't believe you worked for him.

and they voted their hopes, which did not include "insurance reform," but universal health care. I doubt we can get those voters to vote again after they have seen how the popular will is subverted by Beltway politicians.


You can shove that ignorant and stupid comment where the sun doesn't shine.

Nothing less than full equality

September 11, 2009

Probably the biggest reason I said that was that I believed in Barack Obama. I chose, as did Dustin Lance Black, who wrote the film Milk, to leave California in the last days before the election--we went up to Nevada to campaign for Obama, and we were working precincts in Reno to try to help win the state, which we did win.

Then I came home to California, and I listened to the voicemails that came in while I was gone. There were the robo-calls, and they said, "Please listen to an important message from Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama." And there was Barack Obama's voice saying, "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman."

The election results came in, and we started to celebrate, and then the news came from California, and it was devastating. I couldn't believe it. Then Inauguration Day comes, and who's there to give the benediction? Rick fucking Warren.

Then, at the end of February, Speaker Nancy Pelosi gave an interview to a gay newspaper in San Francisco. Nancy Pelosi has actually been a friend to me--she helped me with the quilt; she held the first fundraiser for the quilt in her home; she was the one who went to the National Park Service when they wouldn't let me display the quilt and convinced them that I would fluff it every 20 minutes so that the grass wouldn't die under it.

I think Nancy genuinely believes in equality for gay people, but she gave an interview to a gay newspaper in San Francisco, in her district, which has probably the largest concentration of gay and gay-friendly people in the world, and she said that repealing the Defense of Marriage Act was not a priority.

Then I called up Barney Frank, who was on our side before he was outed, and said "Barney, would you be willing to expand the ENDA bill to include housing and public accommodations?" And he said, "No, it won't pass."

http://socialistworker.org/2009/09/11/nothing-less-than-equality

No more waiting for crumbs

Sherry Wolf, author of Sexuality and Socialism: History, Politics and Theory of LGBT Liberation, makes the case for demonstrating in Washington at the National Equality March on October 11. Sherry is currently on a speaking tour of the East Coast.

September 18, 2009

THE NEWS this week that New York Rep. Jerry Nadler has proposed legislation to repeal the Clinton-era Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) would have been sufficient to quell the demands of LGBT activists one year ago.

Today, Nadler's bill is a welcome step. But the fact that it comes seven months into the presidency of a man who promised to repeal DOMA--and amid comments from Democratic leaders like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that getting rid of the federal anti-marriage equality law isn't a "priority"--highlights the molasses pace of LGBT rights legislation and the bankruptcy of the incrementalist strategy that has guided the LGBT movement for decades.

Like the moribund Equal Rights Amendment campaign for women's constitutional equality--initiated in 1923, reintroduced in 1972 and never passed by the required 38 states--LGBT gradualists have argued for a state-by-state legislative approach to winning change.

Enough begging for crumbs. If we want equal rights for LGBT people in all matters governed by civil law in all 50 states, we have to demand it from the federal government--and that means getting out and marching on October 11 in Washington, D.C.

http://socialistworker.org/2009/09/18/no-more-waiting-for-crumbs

Thanks for posting.

Did Obama endorsed Harry Reid's call to push for legislation repealing DADT? Has DOJ stopped defending DOMA?

Please tell me, what has happened recently that can give hope to LGBT Americans that their concerns are not being trumped over those of Rick Warren?

paid attention you will remember he wants Congress to write a law to change the policy knowing they will sit on their hands. He's said repeatedly that if he does a stop order or any signing statement it will give them leave to sit on their hands or the next president can reverse it.

:shrug:

Timing is important, and I do believe that Obama is committed to the both ending both DADT and DOMA--but he cannot do it alone. Congress must act to change the laws.

lol

October 5, 2009, 11:30 am

Obama to Address Gay Rights Organization

By Jeremy W. Peters

Many gay rights activists have become increasingly vocal about their frustration over what they see as tepid support from Mr. Obama. While the president has professed support for overturning the ban on gays in the military and called the law that precludes federal recognition of same-sex marriages discriminatory, he has not engaged on gay rights issues as actively as some had hoped.

The Justice Department is defending the federal marriage law, known as Defense of Marriage Act, much to the dismay of many gay rights advocates. And Mr. Obama has been noncommittal about when he will move to end the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy. In June, he acknowledged their irritations at the slow pace of change at a gathering of about 250 gay rights leaders who had been invited to the White House.

While it remains to be seen what Mr. Obama’s appearance at the dinner will do to his standing in the eyes of gay rights activists, his speech may mollify some of their concerns.

His appearance will mark only the second time a sitting president has spoken to the Human Rights Campaign. The first time was in 1997 when Bill Clinton spoke to the group. That was the first time a sitting president had ever addressed a gay rights organization.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/05/obama-to-address-gay-rights-organization/

As in any relationship, words must match deeds or else they become empty words.

Threadcrapping aside, good news.

is just an excuse to delay action. I mean, Obama talking is far from new. He's said all kinds of things in his career, from 'I support marriage equality' to 'I believe marriage is between a man and a woman' so his words are not exactly currency in the community he is, yet again, trying to pawn off with words.
Wake me when he stops firing people for being gay. Until then, his actions are far more eloquent than any oratory he can muster.

lately, any post announcing something about which the President will speak will be met with "But it means nothing until he actually DOES something" remarks.

On the other hand, if he didn't even do this, he'd be getting the "He's not a real leader" stuff.

:crazy:

lot of 'ignored's in this thread. And that's okay!

Wake me up when Obama's words match his deeds, as far as LGBT rights go.

From a new LBN thread, we already know that the "peace option" is off the table in Afghanistan.

that they're ignoring a whole boatload of posters.

ISn't the point of ignoring them to do just that: ignore them.

But then I don't understand the concept of ignore to begin with as I think it kind of defeats the purpose of a discussion board.

Nothing he does will make those ungrateful gays happy.

See, this is precisely the problem. You have an entire class of people actively disincluded from equality in this country, and where are your sympathies?

With the most powerful man on earth.

That's why nothing gets done in this country. Oh, but you support equality, I'm sure. From the safety of the parlor and everything.

And I love the tone. After getting hit multiple times by the administration and almost no action on our issues, you're still bitching and moaning that LGBTers dare not be totally over the moon about yet another speech.

Can I have my party back from conservatives now?

she is the victim of the bad gays she has had to put on ignore.

n/t

about this even if it means it's time for some to take a crap on PO speaking at this yearly event where they are honored to ".. receive HRC’s first-ever Edward M. Kennedy National Leadership Award."!

Andrew Sullivan, much as I loathe him, speaks for me on this issue:



http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/10/obama-will-attend-hrc-dinner.html

K&R your post.

:kick:

wherein most of the straight people are clapping each other on the back over the President's speech and most of the gay people are underwhelmed, but the straight people aren't listening because it feels better to keep clapping each other on the back.

That reeks of "Why would I trouble my beautiful mind?"

At this point, I think these threads are really meant to actively rub our noses in our inequality. They know the administration has done nothing, they know the community is pissed, they know we're second class citizens. Still, some nothing gets announced, and the straights applaud and fall all over it, knowing how most of us feel.

It's intentional.

and I think they're mortified by threads like this. And I think you're right: at this point it's intentional.

:rofl:

Is that they never really give us any good bait. This thread is just sort of boring and obvious.

Why can't it ever be a box, some string, and Gerard Butler? I mean, at least make it worth our while.

EraOfResponsibility HopeOverFear always loves to talk about his. I think it's sweet!