08/09/2007
As Dems Prepare for 'Gay Debate', Obama Reveals LGBT 'Council'
As you know, tonight is the HRC/LOGO-sponsored Presidential Forum on LGBT issues. Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson will be participating. Chris Dodd withdrew late last Friday, citing scheduling conflicts, and Joe Biden is not participating. He also said scheduling conflicts were to blame.
Clinton, Edwards, and Obama are holding dueling fundraisers in West hollywood to coincide with tonight's events.
As a preface to tonight's event, Barack Obama today announced the formation of a National LGBT Leadership Council, headed by his campaign's national LGBT liaison, Stampp Corbin.
It's unclear what the role of Obama's National LGBT Leadership Council will be, other than to reflect his support within the LGBT community to potential voters. Edwards flashed a similar list in April. Obama also announced that house parties will be taking place across the nation concurrent with tonight's "gay debate". The senator also recently launched an "Obama Pride" section of his campaign website, capped with a flashy rainbow logo (above right).
The members of Obama's National LGBT Leadership Council, after the jump...
Stampp Corbin, National LGBT Liaison, Obama for America; Former Human Rights Campaign Board Member; High Tech Entrepreneur
Terje Anderson, VT, Former Executive Director for the National Association of People with AIDS
Tom Barbera, NH, Board Member, Bay State Stonewall Democrats and Vice Chair, SEIU National Lavender Caucus
Paris Barclay, CA, Emmy Award Winning Producer and Director
Michael Bauer, IL, Community Activist
Tommy Bennett, IL, Radio Personality, Tom Joyner Show
Rosalyn Bugg, CA, Community Organizer
Phil Burgess, IL, National Director, Pharmacy Affairs, Walgreens
Ed Butler, NH, State Representative
Beth Bye, CT, Connecticut State Assemblywoman
Thomas Chaderjian, IL, Stonewall Democrats
Gary Cloutier, CA, Councilmember and Vice Mayor, Vallejo
Jon Cooper, NY, Suffolk County Legislature Majority Leader
Craig Covery, MI, Councilman, Ferndale City
Terry Crow, MO, Attorney
Chris Diebel, IA, Business Leader
Karla Drenner, GA, State Representative
Bevan Dufty, CA, San Francisco Board of Supervisors
Rick Garcia, IL, Director, Equality Illinois
Carlos Garza, IA, Chair, Des Moines Pride
Richard Gordon, Supervisor, San Mateo County Board of Supervisors
Nancy Greaney, NH, PFLAG New Hampshire
Greg Harris, IL, State Representative
Wendy Howell, VT, Community Organizer
Chris Hughes, IL, Founder, Facebook; Obama Campaign Director of Online Organizing
Harold Janeway, NH, State Senator, PFLAG Member
Vincent Jones, CA, Executive Director, Center for Health Justice
Nicole LeFavour, ID, State Representative
Ed Lehman, CA, Union Organizer
Robert Lilligren, MN, VP, Minneapolis City Council
Gordene Mackenzie, MA, MA Transgender Political Coalition
Sharon Malhero, IA, Activist
Timothy Patrick McCarthy, MA, Harvard University
Darryl Moore, CA, Berkeley City Council Member
Ed Murray, WA, State Senator
Nancy Nangeroni, MA, MA Transgender Political Coalition
Michael Noll, CA, Vice Mayor, Signal Hill
Renae Ogletree, IL, Community Organizer
Paul Provost, MN, Business Manager
Rebecca Prozan, CA, Chair, Alice B. Toklas Club
Nicole M. Ramirez, CA, City Commissioner, San Diego
Tonyia M. Rawles, CA, Bishop-Elect, Unity Fellowship Church Movement
Donna Red Wing, CO, Activist
Dr. Penny Robbins, IL, Reverend
Gene Robinson, NH, Bishop
Robert Ryken, IL, Attorney
Deborah Shore, IL, Commissioner, Chicago Metropolitan Water Reclamation District
Stephen Smith, CA, Former DNC Member
Eric Tabor, IA, Chief of Staff, Attorney General Tom Miller
Maxim Thorne, NJ, Former Executive Director, Head Start New Jersey
Dr. Leanne Tigert, MA, Minister
Lew Todd, NY, Founding Member, Stonewall Democratic Club, Gay Activists Alliance, National Gay Task Force
Tom Tunney, IL, Chicago Alderman
David Upthegrove, WA, State Representative
Tawnee Walling, NH, Director of Seacoast Outright
Gene Webb, IL, University of Chicago
Richard A. Wilson, IL, Chair, National Lesbian and Gay Law Association
Tobias Barrington Wolff, PA, University of Pennsylvania Law School
You may have missed...
Candidates to Hold Dueling Fundraisers on Gay Debate Night [tr]
Posted 8:23 AM EST by Andy in Barack Obama, Election 2008, Gay Rights, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
By noontime, Hilary will counter with her own LGBT support council. I do not disagree with Obama's opinion on equality for same-sex couples in the way of civil unions, but this is politics, nothing more.
Posted by: Stephen | Aug 9, 2007 9:21:59 AM
Thanks, Stephen, for proving you are as retarded about what's already gone on in this campaign as you are about marriage equality and any number of other things [politics are politics, you imbecile].
Hillary, like Edwards, released her initial list IN APRIL, which included Billy Jean King and has since added out Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin and others.
Don't know what took Obama so long, but I'm happy to see it now, and look forward to his making LGBTs a higher priority in his campaign. Hopefully, the combined moral example of all the Democratic candidates' nearly identical positions can shine needed light on the moral black hole that the Repug candidates have created.
537
537
537
Posted by: Leland | Aug 9, 2007 9:48:09 AM
That's my point, Leland: Hilary will release an revised initiative just to trump Obama here.
Now, go take a sedative.
Posted by: Stephen | Aug 9, 2007 10:07:39 AM
All of the Dems who want the White House are against same sex marriage (except for a notable few who have a very slim chance at getting the nomination). Now if partisans want to argue that one candidate is better than another, that's fine. However, let's not delude ourselves in assuming the Democrats are on our side.
Posted by: James | Aug 9, 2007 10:10:47 AM
Well some of them are talking about health care, foreign policy issues, getting out of Iraq, dealing with the disappearing middle class and other things which also affect my life, which affect my life more than gay marriage actually.
Posted by: Charles | Aug 9, 2007 10:17:48 AM
Charles,
Excellent point. And that's the rub that all minorities have to grapple with. The balancing act between our particular issues and the larger trends that we also have to deal with.
Posted by: James | Aug 9, 2007 10:45:08 AM
thank you, charles. while equality issues are tantamount, there are other issues that will effect my life just as much.
Posted by: titus | Aug 9, 2007 10:48:19 AM
Yes, Hillary has released a list of her months ago.
"However, let's not delude ourselves in assuming the Democrats are on our side."
In politics, there is an enormous difference between being against us and not being the most publicly for us a candidate can be. It's cynical and dealing with lessers of evils, but there is a difference between the Democrats who support us in everything but marriage (stopping there for, unfortunately again, political reasons), and the Republicans who are actively against us and not supportive of us in any way. These Democrats take their positions because of election politics, and would never act, if they do act at all, against us, legally, in terms of actually banning marriage, etc.
Posted by: Bryan | Aug 9, 2007 10:53:25 AM
James & Charles - I agree 100%
Posted by: gabriel | Aug 9, 2007 11:03:25 AM
Bryan,
Really? Who put in "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." What about the "Defense of Marriage Act." I'm no fan of the GOP but this line has nothing to do with history.
"...would never act, if they do act at all, against us, legally, in terms of actually banning marriage, etc."
Posted by: James | Aug 9, 2007 11:09:04 AM
Hillary started her LGBT council in April? Big fucking deal!
She also initially voted for the Iraq war,and then changed sides as the tide of popular opinion shifted. Obama was against it from the start.
All this is just political posturing. Elections are over a year away people. How can you possibly place any importance on this story? Sheesh.
Posted by: soulbrotha | Aug 9, 2007 11:09:33 AM
Well the primaries are being shifted, so the first primary may actually be at the end of this year, so we will know who the final candidates are very early. And considering the mess the next president is going to have to clean up after Bush and Iraq and the continuing threat of terrorism and threat of a severe recession...yeah, I think this is important. Sorry it's not entertaining enough for you.
Posted by: Charles | Aug 9, 2007 11:15:59 AM
Oh, Stephen, how lame. Even for you. You dishonestly try to salvage your faux fact while consistently misspelling her name. Note it's TWO l's not one. And you think I need meds? May I suggest you domestic partner with a gun to your temple?
Posted by: Leland | Aug 9, 2007 11:21:39 AM
Could someone please tell me exactly WHERE in Los Angeles this event is taking place?
Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Aug 9, 2007 11:36:20 AM
First, James, as you may recall, if you think a LITTLE harder, it was MR. Clinton not Mrs. Clinton who was President when DADT and DOMA were created.
While they certainly relate to issues possible within Bryan's "etc.," they are already on the books. As for your implied suggestion that Dems might ban marriage, not only is that NOT, as many mistakenly believe a part of DOMA, but Hillary [and Edwards and Obama] have said they support elimination of the part of DOMA that denies federal benefits for state-sanctioned legalized same gender relationships. [The other part, empowering states to deny recognition to marriages from other states is effectively superfluous as states have passed their own versions]. Further, Edwards has specifically said his administration would do nothing to interfere with the legalization of marriage equality.
You may not be a "fan of the GOP" [or you could me a mole], but, in any case, you appear to not be a fan of details either.
Posted by: Leland | Aug 9, 2007 11:37:25 AM
Leland,
So when exactly DO you behave like a human being and not a rabid dog?
Posted by: Stephen | Aug 9, 2007 11:42:14 AM
Now ladies pleeze!
For someone living across the pond [Ireland to be exact], can someone comment on the significance (or otherwise) of Obama's list? I am not familiar with any of the names. Don't know why people are quibbling about the GOP, they have not and will not do anything for LGBT rights - so what does the Democratic Party offer this time out apart from someone who looks good with a pearl necklace... and Hillary Clinton...?
Posted by: Sean R | Aug 9, 2007 11:52:48 AM
Leland,
My posts never accused Mrs. Clinton of anything. I did point out that a Democrat put DOMA and DADT in place. And I wasn't trying to imply a same-sex marriage ban. Just pointing out that when it comes to marriage rights, the major Democratic contenders agree. My larger point is this: just like with the black vote, the Democratic party takes the gay vote for granted. Promises are made during campaigns and once in office, those same deals are broken. Our vote needs to be in play and we need to hold both parties accountable.
As for the mole comment, others can decide if that applies.
Posted by: James | Aug 9, 2007 12:11:51 PM
Funny line, Sean! When did "June Cleaver" announce? LOL.
As for your question, it's a little hard to answer, and all answers, including mine, can't help but be subjective. From the very rough standpoint of influential local, regional, or national name recognition, I'd say these are Obama's best so far:
Bevan Dufty, CA, San Francisco Board of Supervisors
Chris Hughes, IL, Founder, Facebook
Rebecca Prozan, CA, Chair, Alice B. Toklas Club, San Francisco
Nicole M. Ramirez, CA, City Commissioner, San Diego
Donna Red Wing, CO, Activist
Gene Robinson, NH, Bishop
But he also has several other names who bring their own list of contacts and compatriots from the organizations, such as the DNC [Democratic National Committee], HRC, etc., as well as other local elected officials. While it would be sadly easy for many even in the US to believe that the top of any LGBT pyramid here consists essentially of Reichen and Rosie and Ellen and Carson and HRC, the positive fact is that there are thousands of out LGBTs throughout American politics and multi-issue community groups and corporations. The negative fact is that our "power" is disproportionately small to that number.
I am a little surprised that Obama's list doesn't include more LGBT "heavyweights," but most have already committed to Hillary, Edwards, and the others. From the standpoint of financial and political clout [the latter by way of years of hands on experience and influence in organized political campaigns, e.g., Dufty for Obama; Geto, Hochberg, Baldwin for Hillary; Mixner for Edwards], I'd say Hillary has the best list of LGBT backers and Edwards the second best. She also leads so far, as you may know, in self-identified gay money donors, while Obama leads in donations overall.
Posted by: Leland | Aug 9, 2007 12:21:26 PM
I'm a little shocked at everyone's back and forth on this topic...and not ONE of you said anything about Dennis Kucinich. He's the only one not playing politics here and he is 110% for everything we stand for! Wake up and look beyond CNN / NBC / and the 24-months-prior-to-elections hype!! Can't you see that all the other candidates are not willing or brave enough to stand by you like Kucinich is and will. ? Be brave like him and give him your vote...don't waste it on someone who won't stand for you 100% post-election.
Posted by: Jerry in Rhode Island | Aug 9, 2007 12:33:06 PM
Jerry... that is because that conversation started in another comments section (Poll: A 'Gay Rights' Candidate is a Swing State Loser)
Posted by: gabriel | Aug 9, 2007 12:39:22 PM
Maybe I’m having gay fatigue. Maybe I’m just at an age where I wonder about things in a completely different way. Tonight, we have the Democratic hopefuls sitting down in West Hollywood to debate gay and lesbian issues. Which is nice. But how important is it, really? For the most part gay people go about their lives with relative ease. We see ourselves portrayed rightly and wrongly on television and in the movies. We party, we fall in love, we seemingly have more sex than most and we have this odd little community. We thrown into a mix of people we don’t really know: lesbians, transgender, and bisexuals. But apparently we are all in the same boat. Somewhere in time, we, or some decided that it was time we had a wedding. We couldn’t leave it at domestic partnership; we demanded that most sacred of heterosexual institutions: marriage. While it would seem that having rights, like if your partner becomes ill, or dies, that you have some legal protection would be paramount, that doesn’t seem to be the case. We want marriage. Any reasonable person would have to admit that gay rights in this election, when compared to the bounty of other issues, seem paltry. I would like my candidate to be for me, but if my country is falling apart, which could happen, I would like to think they have a vision for the country, not a particular club.
Posted by: zuke | Aug 9, 2007 1:05:06 PM
If I have to 'settle' for civil unions but we get the hell out of Iraq and somebody does something about healthcare, well then, that's a compromise I am more than willing to make.
Posted by: Gregoire | Aug 9, 2007 1:09:59 PM
Just to set the record "straight", it was a Republican congress which passed the Defense of Marriage Act, although it was signed by Bill Clinton--mostly because he had to work with a Republican congress and had very little political support in Washington at the time. Besides, I think all can agree that the Defense of Marriage Act is better than a federal marriage amendment. Don't Ask, Don't Tell was an improvement over a time when people could be removed from the military simply for rumors about their sexuality, or could be questioned and humiliated by their superiors. Granted neither are ideal, but when you have a Republican congress passing the laws, you obviously aren't going to get an ideal government.
Posted by: Justin | Aug 9, 2007 1:22:28 PM
The Democratic Party takes blacks and gays for granted? So what? Blacks and gays take the Democratic Party for granted. You're not going to see Hillary, Barack, John, Joe and the others speaking before one of those conservative, "family values" type groups where all the guys secretly give head because they're afraid of big black men in the park...at night. Must be lights in the park.
The Democratic Party did what I wanted it do 40 years ago, and for that I'm loyal. The Republican worked for me 150 years ago, but they've used me as a weapon to get white racist votes since the 1960s. I hate Republicans.
Does my comment have anything to do with what y'all were talking about?
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Aug 9, 2007 1:35:15 PM
"...we demanded that most sacred of heterosexual institutions: marriage."
A day on Towleroad just isn't complete until a Republican (gay or straight) shuffles through, chanting that age-worn 'keep quiet, fags!' mantra.
Posted by: Paul | Aug 9, 2007 1:50:04 PM
Paul,
Paltry in comparison (this "it must be called marriage" thing) it is in comparison to the current level of poverty, war, lack of health care, poor infrastrucures, etc., as Zuke pointed out.
If you receive the same benefits, WHY must it be called marriage? In fact, it cannot. That can only be defined as between a man and a woman for magnificent reason, intrinisic ONLY to that relationship.
Posted by: Stephen | Aug 9, 2007 1:58:35 PM
Brother Ezekiel, I'm sorry. I was warned but Andy woke the Stephen Troll and I fed it. Mea culpa. Mea maxima culpa.
Posted by: Leland | Aug 9, 2007 2:06:24 PM
We have the ability to define words however we want. There is no special degree that says "marriage must only and always means between a man and a woman." Civil unions are akin to "separate but equal" and we all know how that worked out.
And let's not forget that marriage "has always been" between a man and a woman simply because gays have never been able to marry. If they were given that right 2000 years ago, we would, right now, be defining marriage as a union of two *people*. How do you want future generations to view marriage? We can end discrimination. It's just a word. Don't let it control how you think.
Geez, why does this forum cause me to be so opinionated? I'm going back to lurking and will save my comments for when Andy posts a pic of a hot guy.
Posted by: Gino | Aug 9, 2007 2:20:35 PM
"If I have to 'settle' for civil unions but we get the hell out of Iraq and somebody does something about healthcare, well then, that's a compromise I am more than willing to make"
I second your thought as long as civil unions include the same rights as married couples it doesn't really matter to me what it is called.
What does matter to me among the other things in your list is a foreign policy that doesn't force me to pretend to be a Canadian whenever I travel, the global and local Aids epidemic, the supreme court, the environment, and some meaningful and substantial plan to fill the lack of hope that seems to be fueling the desperate, violent lives of inner city kids.
Posted by: Giovanni | Aug 9, 2007 2:30:04 PM
Rarely have I ever posted a comment but I just can't help myself anymore. Leland, you are THE troll of Towleroad. Pot. Kettle. Black. I love this site, I have visited it daily for I think couple years now and the only consistent weak point in it is you. You don't have to be a part of every post, the world will continue to exist without you and your opinions, you solipsistic bottom-feeder.
Posted by: TK | Aug 9, 2007 2:38:48 PM
I should say it doesn't really matter to me FOR NOW - eventually it will but the greater battle and the one more likely to be won across the nation is the fight for equal rights.
Posted by: Giovanni | Aug 9, 2007 2:41:00 PM
typo -
should read
Debra Shore, IL, Commissioner, Chicago Metropolitan Water Reclamation District
see debrashore.org
she's my sister!
Posted by: otterpop | Aug 9, 2007 2:57:35 PM
Sweet Jesus, why didn't Obama just put every gay and lesbian in America on his council???
Posted by: Nate Nelson | Aug 9, 2007 3:45:50 PM
Thank God I live in Canada, cuz there sure are a lot of Uncle Toms in the U.S.... Amazing how many Gays are willing to sit at the back of the bus forever... "Marriage, we don't need that - think of the country"... Jesus Christ, no wonder the Democrats are willing to ignore Gays - and throw us under the bus.
Posted by: GayLib | Aug 9, 2007 4:41:45 PM
RE:Sean's Q about names on the list
Among the names from the State of Illinois are:
Tom Tunney, first out gay man to be elected to the City Council from the strongly LGBT 44th Ward;
Deborah Shore, out lesbian, environmental activist and editor of Chicago Wilderness magazine, newly elected to the Water Reclamation District;
Rep. Greg Harris, out gay man representing Chicago in the State General Assembly, and primary sponsor of Civil Union bill working its way through the House (we're stuck right now with a state Denial of Marriage law, but it looks as if CUs are doable); and
Rick Garcia, Director of Equality Illinois -- Our Chief Lobbyist in Springfield, the guy who talks up pols, counts up votes, and organizes LGBT lobbying days at the Capitol.
So yeah, there are plenty of hard-working folks from Illinois on Obama's crew. And I'd love to know about the people from other states.
Posted by: ChicagoMolly | Aug 9, 2007 6:58:39 PM
It is truly bizarre that the US is having a presidential debate devoted to LGBT issues (sounds more like Jerry Springer episode).
By accepting that such a topic is debatable, you are, necessarily, sending the message that there is a level of bigotry toward LGBT people that is acceptable. Please repeat after me, "If you oppose full equality for homosexual people (including marriage), then you are a bigot... exactly like those people who lynched 'niggers' or gassed Jews."
Even imbeciles understand what that means.
... and can I point out, again, that traditional Christian marriage is having 5 wives who are your property, and who have no status as people. A fad from the 1950's hardly constitutes any reasonable notion of "traditional," no matter how young you are.
Posted by: Awarebear | Aug 9, 2007 8:33:47 PM
Right on, TK! (RE: Leland being the troll here).
Posted by: Stephen | Aug 9, 2007 8:38:21 PM
Yeah Leland, I hear ya. Don't waste your time brother. I gave up on Stephen. I don't even challenge him any more.
I have my husband. We have our son. And none of Stephen's opinions on my relationship with my husband OR the LEGITIMACY of OUR son, will change my life one bit.
The tide is turning and it will eventually sweep Stephen and the other marriage equality nay sayers out to sea. Not soon enough for my taste but hey...
Posted by: Zeke | Aug 9, 2007 9:43:14 PM
Zeke,
Because you say it, doesn't necessarily make it so.
By the way, is your son born from a previous (heterosexual, of course) marriage you were in or is he your adopted son?
As for the tide turning, you'd be surprised how many people - while they may not say it to your face, believe in their heart that marriage is defined as between a man and a woman and what you have with your male partner is something else.
Lastly, as that tide turns, it weakens a nation. Man becomes the ultimate moral judge. God? "Tsk, tsk," they say.
Posted by: Stephen | Aug 10, 2007 4:28:06 AM
That was just a stupid debate.
1. Self-absorbed people
2. Politicians pandering
3. Me, me, me
4. No one is pro-homosexual marriage
Posted by: Silly Wilson | Aug 10, 2007 8:18:55 PM
Matt Sanchez is spreading the rumor that I am "afflicted with AIDS"
Even if this were true, the arrogance and severity of such a charge is damaging. This is truly an evil man and he must be stopped.
http://www.bwog.net/articles/dirty_sanchez#comments
Posted by: Charles Wilson | Aug 10, 2007 8:22:20 PM
Nate, thanks for your comments. You are the first person I have encountered, outside of myself, who calls U.S. queers on the Uncle Tom ways. Marriage is the goal guys. If you don't want it, don't marry. But having the option, to love and be public, is the only way. Anything less is selling out.
Posted by: Farrish Carter | Aug 13, 2007 4:36:58 AM
Sorry, that was not Nate's comment, it was gaylib's.
Posted by: Farrish Carter | Aug 13, 2007 4:39:41 AM