"I don't care if it means I go to prison. In some respects I hope I do because then the Prime Minister and my country would have to get involved and that would add to the embarrassment for Russia. Those calling for a boycott don't understand that the Olympics and Paralympics could be the one chance these sportsmen and women have to achieve their goals. Yes, they can be sympathetic towards our cause but their first goal must be to do their best. I say to Stephen, Rupert and all those backing a boycott that Sochi is going to happen whatever they say and they should join me so our collective message to Russia is stronger. It's much more powerful to be there than not...But the bigger reason for not boycotting Sochi is that you'd simply be putting your head in the sand. Isn't it much better to educate Russians and shed more light on the legislation both in Russia and worldwide? It is shocking. It's like Germany in the Thirties. We shouldn't ignore this."Lee is a gay 10-time British equestrian gold medalist
.gif)
"We've been very involved in CPAC for over a decade and have managed a couple of popular sessions. However, we will no longer be involved with CPAC because of the organization's financial mismanagement and movement away from conservative principles," said Tom McClusky, senior vice president for FRC Action.I don't get GOProud at all, these folks could care less about us and will do anything to crap on our rights. Yet, GOProud continues to cling to their side. Are these folks gluttons for punishment? This makes no sense at all, ya'll.
"CWA has decided not to participate in part because of GOProud," CWA President Penny Nance told WND.
FRC and CWA join the American Principles Project, American Values, Capital Research Center, the Center for Military Readiness, Liberty Counsel, and the National Organization for Marriage in withdrawing from CPAC. In November, APP organized a boycott of CPAC over the participation of GOProud.
The spat over Arizona's new immigration expanded Tuesday as a state official dared the city of Los Angeles to follow through on its new boycott by agreeing to give up the 25 percent of electricity that city gets from Arizona sources.
In a letter to Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Arizona Corporation Commissioner Gary Pierce said a boycott war is bad for both sides, and said he would "be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements" to end the electricity flowing to Los Angeles.
"I am confident that Arizona's utilities would be happy to take those electrons off your hands," Mr. Pierce said. "If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona's economy."
Uh oh, sounds like fighting words.
During a morning-long debate on the resolution, council members compared Arizona's action to those of Nazi Germany and the beginning of the Holocaust, as well as the internment and deportation of Japanese Americans during World War II.They are really feeling the cold shoulder in the dry heat.
"Los Angeles is the second-largest city in this country, an immigrant city, an international city. It needs to have its voice heard," said Councilman Ed Reyes, one of the resolution's sponsors.
"As an American, I cannot go to Arizona today without a passport. If I come across an officer who's having a bad day and feels that the picture on my ID is not me, I can be … deported, no questions asked. That is not American."
The action was approved 13 to 1, with Councilman Greig Smith casting the dissenting vote. Smith did not comment. The council also called on the city attorney's office to review all of the city's $58 million in existing contracts with Arizona companies to determine which can be canceled.
The resolution, which now heads to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, would still allow city officials to travel to Arizona under "special circumstances" that are in the city's interests. Also, existing contracts with Arizona firms would be exempt from the ban if canceling them would lead to "significant additional cost" to the city.
1. I thought we were already boycotting the DNC. Am I the only who thought that the gAyTM was already supposed to be shut down?
2. The list of charges against the DNC, in its current form, contains some half-truths and unconfirmed rumors on it. According to MLK, self-purification was an entire step when it came to executing a social justice action, and it should be instinctively obvious as to why. If we're seeking justice, we have to base our actions in truth.
3. They say the boycott ends once ENDA is passed and DOMA and DADT are repealed, but they don't specify whether they mean a transgender-inclusive ENDA or not. Since a known and unapologetic transphobe is organizing this, it's a very appropriate question. (And, yes, I would say the same thing if a homophobic transsexual person were organizing something like this.)
4. There has been some movement forward on LGBT issues. Hate crimes legislation passed, discrimination against trans folks in government was banned, a slew of LGBT people were appointed to high-ranking positions, LGBT-specific health care provisions were included in the House bill, an inclusive ENDA's plugging along, the HUD opened up their definition of family to include LGBT families, the Census Bureau will release data on same-sex couples who put themselves down as "married," the HUD will study LGBT housing discrimination for the first time ever, increased HIV/AIDS treatment funding through the Ryan White CARE Act was proposed in the House, the DHHS lifted the HIV travel ban, abstinence-only education is most likely gone, and the DHHS has promised to create an LGBT senior resource center.
These are important changes for lots of people in the community, and if the biggest thanks the DNC can expect to get is a boycott, then what motivation do they have to move on more issues?
5. DADT repeal and ENDA could get done soon, but I really don't think that DOMA will be repealed for a good, long while. We're 0-31 in the marriage fight at the state level and same-sex marriage polls poorly. There's no way Congress is going to pass that soon.
6. Outside of a small group of gay megadonors (which hasn't signed on, as far as I can tell), are our dollars really enough to get attention? Considering how easily women got thrown under the bus this weekend, and how much more power they have in the party than we do, I don't know if we have the power to hold Democrats to their promises.
7. Um, so if it weren't for ENDA, DOMA, and DADT, would the DNC be alright? I mean, if the GOP announced tomorrow that they support us on these three issues, then does that mean we should donate to John Boehner?
These are good points, something more to think about.
Joe and I are launching today a donor boycott of the DNC. The boycott is cosponsored by Michelangelo Signorile, and soon others. It's really more of a "pause," than a boycott. Boycotts sounds so final, and angry. Whereas this campaign is temporary, and is only meant to help some friends - President Obama and the Democratic party - who have lost their way.
We are hopeful that via this campaign, our friends will keep their promises. So please sign the Petition and take a Pledge to no longer donate to the DNC, Organizing for America, or the Obama campaign until the President and the Democratic party keep their promises to the gay community, our families, and our friends.
You can find our Frequently Asked Questions, below, that explain the entire campaign. You can use our "Tell a Friend" page to tell all of your friends, family members, and coworkers about this effort (and we won't keep any of the email addresses you entire, they'll all be deleted after the emails are sent).
President Obama has only been in office less than a year, why the rush? In less than a year, serious damage has already been done to the President’s commitments to the gay community. The problem isn’t only that he hasn’t been quick enough to fulfill his promises, it’s that he has actually backtracked on his promises and hurt the cause of civil rights and our community, as detailed above.Serious damage? Really? So I guess the past 8 years wasn't serious damage at all, no sir, none at all.
So today, there will be a protest outside the hotel. Maybe Clinton will come out and talk to the angry gays and allies. He needs some good press.
Robert Garff started trouble with this statement: "We do believe in the proposition of marriage as being between a man and a female,'' he said. “But we reserve the rights of others to believe and act as they wish. … We want our friends who are gay to know that we respect them.''
Well if that's respect, giving $100k to stop gay marriage, I would love to see his idea of disrespect or honor.
For more about the boycott, go here.
We have secret balloting for obvious reasons. Politics frequently generates hot tempers. People can put up yard signs or wear political buttons if they want. But not everyone feels comfortable making his or her positions public -- many worry that their choice might offend or anger someone else. They fear losing their jobs or facing boycotts of their businesses.
And yet the mandatory public disclosure of financial donations to political campaigns in almost every state and at the federal level renders people's fears and vulnerability all too real. Proposition 8 -- California's recently passed constitutional amendment to outlaw gay marriage by ensuring that marriage in that state remains between a man and a woman -- is a dramatic case in point. Its passage has generated retaliation against those who supported it, once their financial support was made public and put online.
They should have realized the consequences of their actions.
