Bill Smith is the Deputy Executive Director of Gill Action Fund. In the Advocate, he offered a thoughtful analysis of the LGBT landscape in the post-election environment.
However, I do have a few questions.
Bill: Although it’s been said before, it bears repeating — we must get out of the partisan ghetto and insist that LGBT rights are human rights, not partisan positions. When we allow ourselves to be seen simply as agents of the Democratic Party, we’re building barriers that impede progress with thoughtful Republicans, who we will almost always need to win. We also need thoughtful LGBT Republicans, who do the hard work of having difficult conversations with other Republicans without being apologists for antigay voices. Our freedom to marry, to serve our country, and to work to support our families transcends politics, and we must confidently and positively make our case with equal vigor to Democrats, Republicans, and independents alike.
Wayne: Are we really in the partisan ghetto by choice? I genuinely can’t think of one instance where an LGBT organization had the vote of a member of the GOP and said, “Let’s reject this vote because we don’t like the “R” in front of his or her name.” I’d challenge anyone to find one instance where this has occurred.
Having worked at the Human Rights Campaign from 1998-2003, I can tell you that we went out of our way to engage in bipartisanship, even when it pissed off the LGBT community. I was there when HRC endorsed New York Republican Sen. Alfonse D’Amato. I can’t describe the terror of having hundreds of apoplectic New Yorkers screaming on the phone because they hated the endorsement. I’m still having flashbacks and nightmares!
My point is, the bipartisan thing has been tried in earnest at the federal level for quite some time. It has not worked. During this period, the GOP has moved further to the margins. The number of thoughtful Republicans has diminished and are close to becoming an endangered species. Should we keep trying? Of course, because we can use the support, and having conservatives on-board, such as Ted Olson, has helped our cause.
But as long as the Republican Party has to answer to the Family Research Council or Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) our ability to rise above the partisan ghetto will remain rather limited.
Furthermore, the battle for LGBT equality may be snagged on the Republican obsession with undermining the Obama administration (They won’t even meet with him) and making him a one-term president. The GOP leadership might conclude that if LGBT people fail to gain equality under Obama, they will be upset and more likely to stay home or vote Republican in 2012. If the Republicans can oppose Obama on a huge issue dealing with national security, like an arms control treaty with Russia, they can stomp on ENDA without blinking.
So, my question is, what will be tried to woo Republicans that has not been tried before?
Bill: It’s past time to rethink our federal presence in Washington. It’s broken and it has to be fixed before another two years go by.
Wayne: Wow, this is actually newsworthy. The powerful Gill Foundation is sending a direct message to The Human Rights Campaign that they are not happy with the results in Washington. Does this signal a strategic shift where Gill will get more involved at the national level or fund a proxy? It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
In terms of DC, it seems to me that LGBT leaders have been able to get into the door and sit in the corridors of power. The problem is, we have often walked out of the room empty handed or with a bare minimum. What the Gill Foundation should do is hire the nation’s top negotiators to train LGBT Executive Directors on how to bargain effectively. There should be mock White House and congressional meetings where these experts show us how to maximize negotiations and leverage our power. Negotiating is an extremely difficult art, but these are skills that can be learned and nurtured.
Bill: It’s time to model our federal campaigns after successful organizations like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and the National Rifle Association that understand building and using political capital while insisting on results. There is no legitimate reason we shouldn’t have the ability to be successful on multiple issues simultaneously while not allowing ourselves to be pushed off the agenda by fickle or shell-shocked allies.
Wayne: This is a good idea and one previously stated by Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.). It is a productive exercise to study other lobbies and learn from their success — and failures. There are certainly ways we can improve and grow as a movement and AIPAC and the NRA are good models to observe and dissect. However, there are obvious limits that will keep us from ever having the clout of these groups.
For example, there are as many as 80 million gun owners in America. There are not 80 million LGBT people in America, and if there were, we would be as powerful as the NRA and would have achieved equal rights at least a decade ago.
Comparisons to AIPAC also have limits. Democrats support this lobby because most Jewish Americans are liberal and reliable party voters. Republicans support Israel for two reasons. The first is because the Religious Right wants Israel in the hands of the Jews, to fulfill prophesy of Jesus returning. The second is because the business wing of the GOP can reward defense contractors by building weapons systems for Israel.
While the LGBT movement can influence Democrats, it does not have the crossover appeal, such as AIPAC, in the Republican Party. As I explained earlier, any true embrace of the LGBT movement creates a messy showdown for the GOP with the Religious Right.
Finally, AIPAC and the NRA have relatively homogeneous constituencies that are more easily organized than the unruly and diverse coalition that makes up the LGBT movement. Would these groups maintain such enviable unity if they were juggling transgender concerns, GOProud types, Dykes on Bikes and the black tie dinner crowd? Make no mistake, our LGBT leaders have extremely difficult jobs.
Bill: We must be serious about holding elected officials’ feet to the fire and avoid wallowing in victimhood when they don’t deliver. We must communicate clearly with our friends about what we expect, push them harder than we’re comfortable with until they deliver results, and thank them appropriately when we win. And when they betray our trust or vote against us, fight like hell to beat them. LGBT New Yorkers didn’t accept the results of last December’s awful vote against marriage equality, they got organized. Through Fight Back New York and other organizations, they defeated three antimarriage senators (of both parties) and replaced them with three strong allies. Steadily using this formula will build both respect and a healthy dose of fear for the perils of crossing LGBT voters.
Wayne: These are all good points and the Gill Foundation has done a terrific job in targeted races. The larger questions are — Can these efforts in New York be duplicated in Michigan or Mississippi? What leverage do we have in such places? Can we deliver enough money or votes to make a difference?
Bill: Yes, there were significant losses, and unfortunately another truth about the LGBT community is that we sometimes wallow in our defeats. We have the opportunity now to use the wins of Election Day to triumph over the adversity of the losses. To do that we must make the all too familiar choice: Get busy winning or spend time wallowing. I for one am ready to get busy winning.
Wayne: But crying in my beer is so much fun!
Seriously, political circumstances change, but we must keep working and fighting so the march of progress moves forward.
Senator David Norris says 1,000-strong group on the Facebook site prompted him to step forward for the presidency. The Guardian reports:
The current frontrunner to succeed Mary McAleese as head of state in the Irish Republic admits that it was a Facebook campaign that prompted him to step forward for the presidency.
Two recent opinion polls have put the independent senator David Norris ahead of all other possible candidates. His election next autumn would mark an astonishing change in a country once regarded as one of the most conservative Catholic nations in Europe.
Samuel Brown is a member of New Birth Church, the same church where Bishop Eddie Long has preached many anti-gay sermons. In 2004, Long led a march in Atlanta in support of banning same-sex marriage.
Brown also happens to be a gay male. Brown and his life partner Derrick joined New Birth initially, not saying a word about their sexuality to anyone. In light of the allegations of sexual misconduct surrounding Bishop Eddie Long, Brown has decided to share his story exclusively with BET News to express his discontent with his pastor.
“We hope that 50 Cent was simply expressing enthusiasm for oral sex in an inartful way,” said Truth Wins Out’s Executive Director Wayne Besen. “It would be unconscionable if he were calling on gays to commit suicide in the face of such tragedy. Only a despicable reprobate would do such a thing and leaders from Hollywood to Washington should condemn such rhetoric. Truth Wins Out calls on 50 Cent to clarify his remarks immediately.”
Eight minutes ago, 50-Cent left this message on Twitter:
The other night I made a joke about a blow job. My male followers enjoyed it. So I then went on to joke about women receiving the same….Some how they turned a simple joke about oral sex into a anti gay statement. I have nothing against people who choose and alternative life…Style in fact iv publicly stated my mom loved women. It funny how people think negative statements are news worthy but positive statements are not worthy of coverage.
Well, good for him. We are glad he clarified the Tweet and that it was not anti-gay.
** By the way, Mr. Half Dollar…FYI… it is not an alternate life and people do not choose to be gay.
Nearly a decade after religious extremists attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, our nation’s anti-terrorism policy is in shambles. America is caught in a ruinous cycle, where we simultaneously fund the very enemies we fight, while embarking on morally bankrupt, logically incoherent, economically destructive, and politically suicidal campaigns in distant lands.
George W. Bush told us we invaded Iraq to bring democracy and freedom to the region, while Barack Obama has increased troops in Afghanistan to supposedly keep the volatile area stable.
Yet, this week the Obama administration announced that it is trying to sell the repressive regime of Saudi Arabia up to $60 billion in advanced weapons, including 84 new F-15 fighter jets. How exactly is selling out our values to prop up this fundamentalist dictatorship in the interest of our long-term stability? Could we try any harder to subvert our message of democracy, sabotage human rights in the region, and undermine reformers?
Ironically, only days before the announcement of this massive arms shipment to our “ally”, a high level Saudi diplomat told NBC News that he was seeking political asylum. Ali Ahmad Asseri, the first secretary of the Saudi consulate in Los Angeles, claimed he feared for his life after Saudi officials discovered he was gay and had a friendship with a Jewish woman.
Is such bigotry and persecution what our weapons are defending?
Asseri, who is now in hiding, posted a letter on a Saudi website, condemning his country’s “backwardness”, as well as its decision to allow “militant imams” who have “defaced the tolerance of Islam” to take control of Saudi society.
How easily we forget that eleven of the fourteen 9-11 hijackers were Saudi Arabian. At our own peril, we blithely ignore that Saudi Islamists radicalized nuclear-armed Pakistan. These Sunni extremists are still funneling money into Pakistan to build Wahabi madrassas that brainwash youth into becoming Jihadists. Saudi cash — earned by selling oil to liberal western democracies — is also responsible for the proliferation of mosques that preach hate throughout Europe.
If America really gave a damn about stopping terrorism and promoting human rights, it would invest massively in energy innovation, so we would not feel compelled to fund and arm a nation that treats women like pets, brutalizes reformers, and murders gay people.
Our current policy is insane. We turn a blind eye to international Saudi mischief, and then rely on our brave young soldiers to stop the fruits of their fanaticism in the killing fields of Iraq and Afghanistan. Occasionally, the violence spills over into an American or European city, and we all momentarily focus on the problem, before we get distracted and return to our gas guzzling SUVs and reality TV shows.
While the majority of Americans napped through our historic proposed weapons sale to an archaic country known as the financier of fundamentalism, most people were fixated on the “Ground Zero Mosque” spectacle, where an Imam of the moderate Sufi tradition wanted to create a community center dedicated to peaceful dialogue. Could our nation’s attention span be any shorter or our priorities more misplaced?
America must wake up and wise up if it expects to contain religion-based terrorism.
The first thing we can do is stop making this a battle of Islam vs. Christianity. The entire fight should be recast, as extremism vs. modernity and our criticism must extend across the board to all religions. Peaceful versions of Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, etc., should be praised and rewarded, while intolerant, militant brands of faith condemned, with no exceptions.
To succeed, we must educate ourselves on the various sects. Failing to distinguish between a moderate Imam and Osama bin Laden is as foolish as a Muslim not knowing the difference between Rev. Pat Robertson and openly gay Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson.
What matters is not the broad label of the religion, but what each branch of faith is teaching its children. If hatred, backwardness, authoritarianism are the values taught, it will lead to divisiveness and bloodshed. When love, peace, respect, and modernization are imparted, societies will be uplifted.
Of course, the largest force in undermining national security is the GOP’s embrace of the Religious Right. After all, how can America promote its values and ask Muslim nations to separate mosque and state, when prominent American preachers and public officials are pledging to undermine separation of church and state?
Can you imagine how comforted the Taliban and Iranian mullahs must have been when they watched Glenn Beck’s recent Washington, DC rally and the theocratic calls to return America – a supposedly secular nation — to God?
It is in America’s strategic interest to promote rhetoric and policies that are aligned with our professed secular values. As long as our resources are being used to support nations that export extremism, we can’t say that we are truly in a war against terrorism. It would be more accurate to say we are at war against ourselves.
Shadix Appeared In TWO Video Condemning Ex-Gay Therapy
NEW YORK – Truth Wins Out Advisory Board member Glenn Shadix, 58, died this morning from a fall in his Birmingham, Alabama condo. Shadix was best known for his role as Otho in Tim Burton’s “Beetlejuice” and appeared in more than 70 films and TV shows.
Shadix appeared in two more movies for the writer-director Burton, doing the voice of the mayor in “The Nightmare Before Christmas” in 1993 and playing the orangutan Senator Nado in Burton’s 2001 remake of “Planet of the Apes”.
“Glenn is a hero of mine and one of the kindest people I’ve ever met,” said Truth Wins Out’s founder and Executive Director Wayne Besen. “He had a huge heart and was committed to stopping the harm caused by ex-gay programs. It deeply saddens me that he is gone, but there is no doubt that he left the world a better place.”
Recently, Shadix became involved in LGBT advocacy, discussing in a Truth Wins Out video that he was a survivor of “ex-gay” shock therapy, which aims to turn LGBT people heterosexual. Such therapy is outdated and rejected by every mainstream medical and mental health association, including the American Psychiatric Association, American Medical Association and The American Psychological Association. In Jan. 2010, he joined the advisory board of Truth Wins Out and planned to speak out publicly against “ex-gay” therapy.
“He was having mobility problems, and he was in a wheelchair,” Susan Gagne, Shadix’s sister, said. “It looks like he fell and hit his head in the kitchen, and that’s the cause of death.”
An article in today’s New York Times says that as more Republican gays come out, overt gay bashing is on the outs in the GOP.
The muted reaction reflects not only changing values in the country generally, but also, more notably, among many Republicans and conservatives.
The center of gravity of the conservative movement in this election season is with fiscal conservatives. The Tea Party is infusing the Republican Party with new energy, and Tea Party leaders and supporters say they do not want to talk about social issues: even if they do not personally support same-sex marriage or abortion, they think the Republican Party spent too much time talking about them and not enough time trying to rein in spending.
Truth Wins Out was one of the first organizations to recognize that a tipping point has occurred. As early as May I wrote:
The war over gay rights in America and other modern nations has been largely won. Too many people have come out of the closet and will never go back in for the clock to be turned back.
Most of these out individuals have loyal friends and family members who offer unequivocal love and unqualified support. We have reached a tipping point where LGBT people are even coming out in traditionally conservative bastions where the issue has long been seen as taboo.
This huge shift in society is why we are holding our noses and welcoming people like Ken Mehlman (after his redemption tour), in hopes that thousands of other Closet Kens will come out and end state sanctioned homophobia. This process is happening at an stunningly fast rate, as social conservatives are losing momentum.
“There are now more and more Republicans, and conservative Republicans, who have talked about this issue through the prism of being an equal rights issue, and being an issue that should not define the conservative movement and the party,” said Steve Schmidt, who was part of that inner circle as a spokesman and strategist for Mr. Bush’s 2004 campaign.
This shift is occurring because cynical Republicans that rely on wedge issues to win elections are seeing that gay bashing is losing its power. It seems that border fences, tax giveaways to the rich and launching ill-advised wars in the Middle East pack more punch, these days.
Matthew Dowd, another top strategist for Mr. Bush who broke with him after the re-election campaign, said that same-sex marriage had ceased to be a big issue for many voters — including conservatives and religious ones — even in 2004. In polling and focus groups before that election, he said, Republicans and conservatives cited terrorism, taxes and the war in Iraq as the issues that would move them to the polls.
Of course, the Caveman Cabal will fight like crazy to make sure the GOP remains firmly entrenched in Medieval times.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said Mr. Mehlman’s announcement helped explain “the scandalous failure” of the Republican establishment to fight same-sex marriage. “It is important for the conservative movement that the Republican Party remains committed to its longtime stance on core social issues,” he said.
Perkins can bleat and beat his chest all he wants, but the numbers are no longer on his side:
In a New York Times/CBS News poll conducted in March 2004, a plurality of Americans under 45 — 35 percent — said there should be no legal recognition of gay and lesbian relationships. Forty-five percent of Americans 45 and older said the same. By April 2010, just 24 percent of Americans ages 18 to 44 surveyed said that there should be no legal recognition, and 35 percent of Americans 45 and older said the same.
For the past decade, every time voters wiped away LGBT rights at the ballot box, Perkins and others of his ilk would bellow, “majority rules.” I’m curious if these neo-Puritans will still respect the will of the people when they are entrenched on the minority side of public opinion. My hunch is that they will suddenly lose respect for “the people”.
Immediately after Proposition 8 passed, many who supported same-sex marriage tried to make sense of the results. A set of assumptions gained wide acceptance. Some are correct. Most, however, are just plain wrong. And it’s crucial that we know what happened in the last election before launching another attempt to legalize marriage for all.
I recently headed a team that analyzed data from polls conducted by the No on 8 campaign during the run-up to the election. Our analysis sheds new light on what fueled the Proposition 8 victory.
What they found was that our teetering allies (mostly parents with children under 18) got spooked close to election day by ads that preyed on fears of children getting indoctrinated and, I assume, turning gay:
The shift, it turns out, was greatest among parents with children under 18 living at home — many of them white Democrats
The numbers are staggering. In the last six weeks, when both sides saturated the airwaves with television ads, more than 687,000 voters changed their minds and decided to oppose same-sex marriage. More than 500,000 of those, the data suggest, were parents with children under 18 living at home. Because the proposition passed by 600,000 votes, this shift alone more than handed victory to proponents.
I’ll write more about this later today. In the meantime, check out the report online.
Please read Frank Rich’s column, “Two Weddings, a Divorce and ‘Glee’”. Despite the fact he has not yet quoted me, he remains the top columnist in the nation.
Bill Smith is the Deputy Executive Director of Gill Action Fund. In the Advocate, he offered a thoughtful analysis of the LGBT landscape in the post-election environment.
Weekly Column
