Goldman CEO Discusses Gay Marriage Backlash

BlankfeinLloyd Blankfein became a left-wing hero after the Goldman Sachs CEO came out in support of gay marriage in New York State. Not everyone, however, cheered the money man's decision. Blankfein told a crowd at the "Out on the Street" LGBT finance summit yesterday that Goldman Sachs has lost at least one client since he came out for equality.

At an event discussing Wall Street's role in pushing for greater lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender equality across corporate America, Blankfein said his stance on the matter was "not without price."

Blankfein said there had been some "adverse reaction" on at least one occasion, where a money management client "did not want to continue a relationship" with Goldman in the wake of his advocacy.

"I won't say the name of the client, but if you heard the name, it wouldn't surprise you," he added.

Billionaire and fellow marriage advocate Paul Singer was also at the event and was asked whether he thought his preferred presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, would further alienate and discriminate against LGBT people.

"I don't think it's going to be a harsh environment," Singer said of a potential Romney administration.


  1. Chadd says

    “I don’t think it’s going to be a harsh environment,” Singer said of a potential Romney administration.

    Four or eight years of a Romney administration may not be so harsh; however, the Supreme Court justices he will appoint will create a harsh judicial environment for decades. This election is about far more than the next 4 years. Its about the next 30. Keep that in mind “gay republicans” if you vote for Romney.

  2. Paul R says

    Please. I dated a guy in college who has since become high up at Goldman. Mistake.

    It’s good to hear that the CEO isn’t rabidly antigay, but they’re all Republicans. It’s evil and following the advice of its PR and HR departments.

  3. kpo5 says

    Bingo – Chadd.

    Vote for two more Sonia Sotomayors and Elena Kagans if you have a hard time thinking your vote is going towards President Obama.

  4. ratbastard says

    Masters of spin and public relations, to deflect attention away from their otherwise duplicitous behavior. Little different from organized crime elements who give out free turkeys at Thanksgiving, pay for independence day fireworks, etc. In fact, Goldman Sachs are IMO nothing more than an organized crime syndicate.

  5. Rowan says


    I was just thinking the exact same thing you thought. Not for HIM because he’s a billionaire who supports his gay son from funding Harvard to fighting for marriage equality. The whole family also sits on his foundation.

    Plus the son lives in Massachusets with his husband.

    I could go on why Mitt won’t be a harsh environment for the Singers, though I feel sorry for gays or liberals who come from families like this-where you HAVE to go into the family business. His gay son obv fought hard to be let to be a doctor but his dad still had to somehow be involved by funding the department he created and sitting on the board.

  6. says

    @ CHADD :

    Spot on, dude !
    A Romney administration would replace Ginsberg next year, maybe Kenndey ,who knows ? All the extreme Right needs is one more vote…..they already have doctrinaire Right wing extremists in Scalia, Roberts, Alito, Thomas.

    As you say an appointment to SCOTUS by Romney would defeat our rights for decades.

  7. just_a_guy says

    “It’s never a harsh environment for billionaires.” BINGO. Blankfein’s son will face few worries in life.

    Blankfein is irresponsible in his support of Romney. The middle class is mostly gone, and Romney policies only promise to further eviscerate it.

    Further, Blankfein lacks a grip on reality if he thinks the hate politics of the “Republican” right will not CONTROL a Romney presidency. Sure, he’s not worried about protections for BLANKFEIN’s son, because IMMENSE money will make up for any otherwise inappropriate would-be wrongs on him for being gay.

    True to the Goldman firm form, Blankfein exhibits mere NARROW self-interest. He cites costs to him at Goldman for supporting LGBT equality, and I appreciate that he took them on and did the right thing in that specific regard. But EVEN THAT, however laudable, IS REALISTICALLY mere narrow self-interest–because it SURELY has BROUGHT IN more client loyalty–at least over time–and an anti-equality stance.

    I don’t want to demonize Goldman; I think it’s the GOVERNMENT’S JOB to REGULATE the likes of Goldman.

    But Blankfein’s endorsement of Romney DESPITE even Romney’s recent effective firing of a gay man FOR BEING GAY–and then pretending he’s some kind of beacon of a supporter of gay people–is dishonest.

    And it further demonstrates that the likes of the Goldman firm ARE NOT properly trusted to continue GOVERNING the country without any real oversight.

    The Goldman firm is no J.P. Morgan (the man). And J.P. Morgan himself was not equipped to bring the country’s wealth and success BACK TO THE PEOPLE. No, it took Roosevelt.

    Gawsh, I’d like to see Obama behave more like candidate Obama again (and then govern that way). We NEED another Roosevelt type. And I think Mr. Obama has it in him to show that kind of leadership.

    Lloyd Blankfein does not.

  8. God, some of you are stupid says

    Blankfein doesn’t have a gay son. Read the article.

    Blankfein is a well known Democrat. Goldman Sachs is one of the largest contributors to the Obama campaign. And it’s loaded up with gay people a very queer friendly firm.

    I know that it has become trendy to bash successful businesses (unless they have a little Apple on the back of them), but anybody attacking the assistance that the world’s most influential financial institution provides to our cause is an idiot.

  9. Mic says

    Blank’s read on Romney is wrong. Look what Romney had to do to Grunnell. That’s all you need to know about a so-called ‘gay-friendly’ Romney Administration.

  10. just_a_guy says

    Blankfein could well have a gay son, or gay grandkids. My arguments still apply.

    I haven’t bashed Goldman specifically. In fact, I pointed out that I don’t seek to demonize them.

    Rather, my comment was limited to criticism of Mr. Blankfein’s endorsement of Romney, even after Romney has just basically fired a gay man for being gay. And to Blankfein’s simultaneous claims of being someone who sacrifices for lgbt equality.

    Blankfein’s claims just don’t add up–unless you account for the fact that any gay progeny of Blankfein are taken care of by his money anyway.

    It’s STRICTLY NARROW self-interest for Blankfein is all that I’m saying. And I’m not meaning to villainize Blankfein for that either.

    It’s just that we NEED leaders who work for ENLIGHTENED self-interest, ya know.

    As for lgbt folk at Goldman giving to Obama: Great, cool, I do respect Goldman for that. But I do privately hope it’s because such Goldman folk understand at least that TRULY SUPPORTING success for the middle class actually EVEN BENEFITS THE WEALTHY, and IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

    However possibly naive, I also hope that Obama can’t be simply bought by Goldman money either. That, too, is wrong. And the corruption of money in politics is what I see as the number one problem causing our ongoing economic glut. May Obama come through with a vision to change that, and TRULY increase transparency as he once promised. Now THAT would be a legacy.

    In light of Romney BACKTRACKING on a core moral and ethical issue like equality and dignity for lgbt people, ALL FOR THE SAKE OF REPUBLICAN MONEY: Can you even imagine Romney genuinely taking on the corrupt influence of money in politics??

  11. redball says

    PLEASE. no way in hell i’m buying that a Repub administration will be more gay-friendly than a Dem administration.

    Repubs will put rights on the backburner IN A HEARTBEAT if it means more $$$, power, privilege for the financial elites that they represent.

    DONT GET IT TWISTED. yall are crazy

  12. kansastock says

    “I won’t say the name of the client, but if you heard the name, it wouldn’t surprise you.”

    I smell koch here.

  13. says

    Why not mention the name of the client that left over the equality issue? The same way that this client decided to move his money I think it’s beneficial to be able to determine where and with whom I am spending my money and decide if that’s where I want to spend it. Blankfein should release the information if for no other reason to highlight the persons bigotry and make it known.

  14. jack says

    Gee: I hope that poor billionaire didn’t loose too much money. Actually, I don’t care how much he lost. Suck it fat cat.