no surprise that elizabeth birch is on that list. the ex-HRC leader is the one that pushed that organization into it's "middle ground, let's not do anything controversial" role that it seems to just now be getting out of.

I'm starting to think Obama would have told Rosa Parks to park her ass in the back of the bus. You know, the time not being right for equality.

It's hard to know what is in people's heads. I heard Baldwin say, on MSNBC, that she was going inorder to address the issue. Perhaps, some feel they need to speak up, and are going for that reason. Perhaps, some are more concerned with being reelected. Perhaps, some have bills that they are sponsering, and they are trying to court support for there passing. It is possible to be present at this affair, and still be angry. It's hard to know. Life is a mess, humans, relationships, politics, all of it is a messy dance to a bittersweet melody. We humans don't like being vulnerable, we'd much rather hold things close to chest and play it safe. Hence, why we admire those who are bold, and don't just fight for their beliefs, but who actually live up to them.

"... And now we are standing up for gay rights, AIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEHHHHHHH!!!!"

(I heart you Howard Dean, I just can't seem to quit you.)

I'm copying a comment from ColoradoPols.com about this, from about a week ago.

I think there's a difference between a boycott by donors and nonprofit organizations and not attending as an elected official. Many donors, in fact, have stated they will continue giving to specific officials (ostensibly including Frank, Baldwin, Polis and many pro-LGBT Sens. and Reps.) but will not give to the DNC.

Jared is undoubtedly one of the most high-profile LGBT leaders in the US, from his place in Congress and his profile on CNN, etc. He should remain at the table. His indictment of Obama was fairly scathing, and unlike Barney Frank he refused to go back on his initial statement against the President and this action.

He should attend, and if given the opportunity to speak, call out the administration in public, since VP Biden will be present. I hope he continues his outspokenness while leading members of the administration are there, and I think it would send an ever more powerful message than simply not going.

Pulling out would send a message; but this is also an excellent opportunity to use this soapbox that Polis won't have otherwise.

How is Howard Dean taking a strong stand for civil rights by saying he can't make it because of a "scheduling conflict"? Maybe if he'd said he can't make it because he refuses to support the administration's position on DOMA, I'd be impressed. But a "scheduling conflict"?

If his actual reason for pulling out IS DOMA, he ought to have the balls to say so. And so should all the others. Fucking SAY IT, people. Jesus. Goddamn "scheduling conflict" gets everyone all excited about Howard Dean? Pussy.

By all means, let the Queer Stalinist Purges begin! (head in hands)

Yes unless he says it's because of gay issues Dean doesn't get any credit for this.

All in all I think we need to keep up the pressure, cut off the gay ATM until substantial progress is showing our money is going somewhere, etc. Keep the heat on!

That said, I have detected some backlash from straight progressives. One friend of mine who had the balls to cut the PC crap after a bottle of wine put it to me like this---she said essentially "look even the Repubs know age demographics are on gay marriage's side, they all know that among young people this issue is settled, but universal health care is at a New Deal, once a generation window to take or lose right now because of the economy and political capital.....why waste capital on something even the OTHER side is thinking will decide itself when some more old people die?"

More from Polis in the Advocate, today:

Q: So was your absence any sort of statement that somehow the step being taken by the President wasn’t significant enough for you to change your plans?

Polis: No, there’s no statement. Certainly, if this had been a major announcement of equal rights for our community, I would have let my teammates down and attended, but this was a small step in the right direction and not something that would have merited me letting my congressional colleagues down.

So since the announcement wasn't "major" but only a "small step," a freshman Congressman decides that a Congressional baseball game is more important than a memo signing ceremony in the Oval Office.

Sounds like Jared was saying, "Fuck that shit," if you ask me.

Oh. I forgot this:

http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail…

To quote Dina:
"I heart you Howard Dean, I just can't seem to quit you."

This x 2.

I meant Tina, not Dina! ACK!

It WOULD be nice if Dean said that was why he was skipping out, but that's not how you keep from totally alienating allies with whom you're disappointed. Obama and co. are getting the message loud and clear, so don't be a big baby and insist that he spell it out.

I'd agree, Matt from Denver, except that I think it's time to start alienating some of those "allies." I don't actually see much evidence that anybody is hearing the message at all, let alone "loud and clear."

Actually, by citing "scheduling conflicts", it sounds more like he's saying "I want to stay away from this whole mess" rather than "I'm protesting because the administration isn't doing enough". I say fie on Howard Dean.

Howard Dean should have been our president.

Meg, keep in mind that Polis and the others have agendas to push besides gay rights. It would be all too easy to screw the pooch by needlessly rubbing their faces by being too explicit. Sure, it will make most of us feel good but is it worth it to them - and their constituents, many of whom don't care about gay rights - to render themselves ineffective in Congress? Keep in mind that three out representatives do not make a bloc.

@18

Thanks Matt.

Both immigration reform and health care are huge items on Polis' agenda. He's probably already taking tremendous heat from the party for dissing the President not just here on the DOMA issue but in voting no on additional war funding. He works for everybody in his district, not simply for the gay community.

Who says the "stronger stand for civil rights" is for Barney Frank to pull out of this fund raiser?

Barney Frank has done nothing wrong, and he is emerging as a leader in the Democratic party. In my opinion, he's a good example of why we should give money to the Democratic pary.

If this event elevates his standing in the party, and makes it easier for him to press his own agenda, then good for him. The only reason he (or the others) should back out is to satisfy the bloodlust of gay blogosphere.

P.S. I do understand why gay donors are pulling out. I would, too.