Tweet
The promised reports from inside the Democratic fundraiser at NBA superstar Alonzo Mourning’s bayfront estate won’t be possible, apparently. Former Democratic Congressional candidate, honorably discharged West Point grad and Iraq War veteran Anthony Woods’ $5,000 check was returned by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and he was denied access to the event today. So no one was around to provide President Obama with personal, necessary context, one-to-one, about the GetEQUAL protests he saw today by land, by sea, and by air.
GetEqual kicked off the protest earlier in the day by launching a weather balloon from which a GetEqual banner was hung, and the balloon was set adrift toward the residence.
Attempts were also made to purchase tickets for the event at $5,000 per person for local activist Itzel Diaz and Anthony Woods, a 30-year-old California resident and recent Congressional candidate who was honorably discharged under the DADT policy in 2008. The two had submitted their check to the DCCC on Friday and were informed Monday morning that they had been denied access to the event.
Woods said he believed he was turned away because he had been discharged.
"I think they were trying to avoid any incident where ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ could be brought up. I think there was a concern that he would be pressed on the issue," said Woods, adding that he had not been given any official reason.
Your money’s no good here, sir: seems to cover it. Anthony Woods was good enough to get sent to Harvard by the military, good enough to lead men in battle in Iraq, and good enough to admit to West Point. But his money’s no good to the Democrats who won’t repeal DADT. And the President who won’t issue a stop/loss order to suspend DADT discharges can’t even face Anthony Woods man-to-man.
Or perhaps this black gay man was unwelcome in NBA superstar Alonzo Mourning’s home.
Well, then — my money is no good either. I’ll give when I get Equal, too.
Interview below by AmericaBlog’s Joe Sudbay last summer when Anthony Woods was running for Ellen Tauscher’s House seat in California. He lost the primary to, and then campaigned for the election of, Lt-Gov John Garamendi, who now serves in Congress.)
Great guy to get to talk to the President today, too bad it couldn’t happen.
71 Comments
Really outrageous, clearly someone at the DCCC must answer for this horrific insult to Anthony Woods. Can’t wait for Kerry Eleveld of the Advocate to have a chance to ask Bobby Gibbs in the WH briefing about this.
I’d skip the D-Trip and donate directly to those candidates deserving of your support. For instance, any one of the progressive caucus who pissed off Obama and Rahm and Baucus by failing to let the public option go down without a fight per the May 11, 2009 deal cut with the health industry big wheels — say, Raul Grijalva…
Obama needs to sit down and have a beer with him…! 8-(
I put Joe Sudbay’s interview last summer with Anthony Woods up top, so that people can get an impression of this wonderful young man who was BARRED from today’s event.
They don’t even bother to hide their bigotry. What a disgrace.
For all of John Edwards’ fault, he admitted that he was uncomfortable around gay people. At least he was more honest.
You know, he said that — but I never felt that from him the one time I met him, very briefly. He turned that electricity on for everybody, it didn’t matter if you were gay, straight, green, or Martian. Man just wanted to be loved by everyone.
It’s awful.
Time for a queer summit at the White House, not a beer summit!
H/T to cbl2 for that.
omg, absolutely
I know you’ve been busy this afternoon. Jest helpin’.
fucking outrageous!
i guess the DCCC is pretty clear about not wanting gay money anymore… nothing like cutting their nose off to spite their face
tweeted and recommended
Commenter at AmericablogGAY:
I believe that the gay community will show the rest of us the way to the light.
GetEQUAL is helping Republicans. FiredDogLake is, too.
Wrong, and wrong.
FireDogLake readers raised $50,000 for Russ Feingold last two weeks, who (last I checked) is a Democrat. How about you, andreww? What have YOU done to elect Democrats in the past two weeks?
Running around on a bunch of LGBT blogs leaving discouraging, and pretty much identical, comments doesn’t count, by the way.
C’mon, andreww, disclose.
Who is paying you to comment repeatedly here and elsewhere about GetEQUAL?
What national LGBT organization do you work for?
Whose ox is being gored here?
Time for full disclosure — it’s very easy, you just need to sign your posts “This is a compensated comment brought to you by The Yooman Rites Champagne.”
Or whoever is paying your freight.
ahhh the I’d rather survive on my knees than fight on my feet contingent has arrived.
aren’t you supposed to giving Solmonese a pedicure ’bout now ? run along
Oh, he’s off to spew his nonsense elsewhere, probably at The Advocate comments section, or AmericaBlogGAY. Just like a little butterfly, or wasp, from flower to flower, leaving his lovely discharge behind him. Careful of what he leaves behind, though — you might catch something you’ll need a clinic visit to treat!
He’ll circle back, though, to check on his missives and see what shit he stirred up; his ego can’t stand not knowing.
Plus, attempting to use SHAME as a tactic?
Vichy Queen.
Obama is helping Republicans by giving Fiorina cover: “My position is that of the President’s.”
Excellent point, Kelly.
There is an entire political party the President is giving cover to with his position that “God’s in the mix” on marriage, and it isn’t the Democratic Party.
It is especially infuriating because in the mid-nineties, while seeking elective office, Barack Obama checked a box on a questionnaire that he “supported the right of LGBT Americans to marry.” You can look it up.
So what changed, Mr President?
Nothing changed – Obama said whatever he thought people wanted to hear in order to get elected then, just as he’s doing now. He’s a serial liar who doesn’t care about anyone but himself.
He got elected to the highest possible office. He doesn’t have to pander anymore.
The man has the principles of a wharf rat.
You’re right – the DCCC is just closeted Republicans, so they shouldn’t be helped.
Chris van Hollen. ’nuff said….
Reddit, if you’d like to upvote this post, please: http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/dpzer/dccc_to_black_gay_west_point_grad_iraq_vet_at/
face palm – ok, how do I vote it up ?
When you click on the link in my comment, there will be little arrows next to the title. Click on the UP arrow.
(If you’ve not yet joined Reddit, be prepared for another delightful time suck to enter your life!)
thanks dahlin ! signing up was very easy
Get Equal is a really terrific use of language and the equal sign E is a brilliant reminder of silence=death. Who came up with it?
“Your money’s no good here” can mean either “Pal, you’re so great that the house is paying your tab, so put your wallet away” or “We don’t like your kind around here, so take your wallet and go.”
Sadly, the DCCC is going for the latter rather than the former.
I wonder what Barney Frank’s reaction to this will be.
Barney will dead pan it as usual.
I always find it ironic when Americablog whines about the way gays are treated by bigots in politics when they are guilty of exactly the same behavior toward transgendered Americans. Not Joe Sudbay so much but as long as he’s associated with Aravosis, he’s complicit.
thought there had been an apology and rapprochement there
Certainly not to me and I was right in the middle of that little flare up.
Besides, that non inclusive ENDA thing was at least the second time that Aravosis crapped on transgendered people over inclusion. The first time was on a very primitive email list called john@gayadvocacy. Once is a mistake, twice is a pattern. I forgave him the first time.
sorry to hear that. damn
I don’t like to sound like a broken record on this but I just don’t see why it’s okay to ally ourselves with a man who absolutely refuses to even tolerate transgendered Americans in the gay community and has in fact done his utmost to convince other members of that community that we harm it somehow. How is that different than allying ourselves with somebody who doesn’t want to include black people or Jewish people or immigrants because he or she feels like their participation will hurt our shared goals? How?
Different percentage of people they know, or acknowledge exist. We all act based on our experiences. Well, some. Others love everyone…I wish.
I’m sorry, Margaret, but I am not allying myself with Aravosis simply by putting up an interview his colleague conducted with Anthony Woods. Joe Sudbay is a good guy, who covered today’s GetEQUAL action well. I know and share your anger at John for his previous actions. But I’m hopeful that he can change, just as Barney Frank has done, in his views or at least his advocacy if not his actual views.
I know you disagree and I respect that. But I don’t think that disagreement needs to be brought into every comment thread where I feature Joe’s work. I don’t think it’s fair to him and I don’t think it’s fair to other FDL commenters. John might change; others have.
I recognize my stake in his views is different from yours and I respect that and acknowledge it.
you’re not a broken record
I don’t think it’s any different than supporting a President who thinks formally recognizing equality will hurt our shared goals
Teddy seems to think I am. Very well. I’ll respect his wishes in this but I will continue to call bigotry and hypocrisy out when I see it and giving traffic to Americablog is like giving traffic to a kkklan blog in my opinion.
Joe Sudbay is a good guy but then there’s that matter of tolerating open prejudice.
I’ll leave you guys alone.
You don’t have to leave anybody alone. And nobody has to click over to A-blog to get the point of this post, either. Or watch the video. So there’s not really any actual traffic generated for A-blog by this post.
I think we have this conversation every time this happens, so I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree about this. But no one needs to go away because of it. You’ve been on this comment thread for forty minutes, since comment thirty. I would expect that someone with views as strong as yours would make your point early on but then wouldn’t stay around. Instead, you commented and participated and THEN decided to make your point.
If a post that includes A-blog is that offensive, I wouldn’t participate at all. I might make my objection early on, but then I wouldn’t continue to discuss the post and the comments about it.
It just seems like as the conversation gets going, you’ve decided to make it an issue, having already participated and conversed at some length. Do you see why I am puzzled? Either A-blog is so offensive that you’re moved to object and sit it out, or it’s not and you participate and comment. But doing things in the other order seems… wilfully disruptive, is that the term I am looking for, maybe?
I know this is a big deal and I’m trying to be respectful of that, Margaret, but I think my communication on the topic deserves a little more than “Out.” (Which, on edit, I see you’ve changed, thank you.)
The reason I participated was because I don’t WANT to be a broken record and I don’t set out to belabor this point over and over but I just don’t get why prejudice against transgendered Americans is tolerated, especially at FDL! I just don’t get it.
I really, honestly don’t want to plague your threads with denunciations of John Aravosis. I’d love nothing more than to forget he exists Teddy but I’m not able. I feel like I’m not being intellectually honest with myself if I point out Netanyahu hating on Palestinians, if I deplore China cracking down on dissent or if I condemn Republicans and their homophobia but then tolerate bigotry directed at me and people like me.
I’ll try to stay away from threads that mention or link to Ablog but can’t you see that these issues are important to me too? If I keep myself deliberately out of them, I am excusing myself from discussing some very important issues.
Prejudice against transgender Americans is not tolerated at FDL.
I am the pioneer here to ensure that’s the case, have always been, for a very long time.
I do see that these issues are important to you. But it seems like a blindside to be participating in a thread, conversating with you about the topic at hand, and then have you bring down the hammer about John, when he has absolutely nothing to do with this thread, and his associate Joe is only tangentially related as the interviewer last summer on the YouTube on the thread.
I hope you find a way to participate wholly and fully; I would miss your voice on any thread I write about, especially ones having to do with the military. But, as you have said often, DADT isn’t about transgender servicepeople as it’s written and enforced, so why are we discussing it so extensively on this thread?
Because the source material atop the post — a video interview about two minutes long and from more than a year ago? — was conducted by the blog-partner of someone who offended you during another battle.
Do you think that is fair? I don’t. Help me figure it out if you think it’s fair, please. I want to make this work, but I want to be fair to Joe and to to the topics I raise.
Thanks.
Actually, the thread initially did not have the YouTube in it at all, or the credit at the end. Proof, I think, that it has nothing to do with AmericablogGAY at all. And the reason why you initially participated.
You can’t really ask fairly to have it both ways, Margaret. Either you abhor A-blog and won’t participate except for a pro-forma protest when work from them appears, or you participate wholeheartedly and completely in all the threads regardless of the source material.
As you yourself have pointed out repeatedly, DADT doesn’t have anything to do with transgender servicemembers, only gay and lesbian (and bi, I guess) servicemembers. So bringing the topic into this thread is both off-topic (unrelated) and derailing to the actual topic, since we then end up talking about something unrelated: this.
Make up your mind, I think: either participate in every thread, with your wonderful and excellent contributions. Or, when there’s anything about A-blog on a thread, make your opposition known and stand aside, regardless of the topic, since the appearance of anything related to A-blog no matter what the topic, offends you so much you eventually feel the understandable need to revisit John’s offense.
Teddy, what can we do to help? Aside from my usual mad e-mails to the WH?
Great question, Twain. You’re so cute and smart.
Hi, Demi. Thanks, and how’s SoCal?
A little too warm, but, oh, well. :)
I think we need to press Obama, and the DCCC, to apologize to Anthony Woods.
Maybe invite him to the White House, seriously.
And you can always send a sheckel or two to GetEQUAL — today’s effort had to cost a bundle, I imagine.
Will be happy to do that. Thanks.
I guess the political strategists at the White House think this is a way to “reach out” to moderates and independents by distancing themselves from the left by discriminating against and alienating gay voters.
This bizzare stance not only alienates the left, but it alienates independents, moderates, and mainstream thought because repealing DADT is a mainstream position. It is not a far left position.
Guess Obama really wants to demoralise the base completely. And he won’t pick up one Republican vote because of this.
Obama is a conservative through and through. The only reason he is not a repug is cause they wouldn’t have a black person run as president. I wonder who else he has lied to over his lifetime.
I wish I had a party with a purpose to vote for.
Teddy, has this story been sent to Olbermann & Maddow?
I know, I know, they’re relentless Obama cheerleaders, but this is SO egregious, it might prompt them to cover it.
I don’t send things to them that reflect badly on Obama; it’s fruitless.
But you are welcome to. Good luck; I hope they pay attention. They SHOULD cover this.
Gaints win…! Onwards and upwards…! 8-)
and totally classy Giants Fans ! – giving the retiring Cox a standing O
they’re like every other politician – they (Obama, DCCC, etc) don’t want to confront any question harder than “How’s Bo Doin’?!?!”
Wow! with a POTUS a man of color & the guy holding the fundraiser ,Alonzo Mournibg, a person of color,this Iraqi vet,a person of color sent to loose life & limbs in Iraq was still not welcomed at the Fundraiser.
That’s Obama for ya folks.
watertiger is upstairs!
Late Night: The Wheels Come Off the Crazy Train
Ooooo … so the Deep Chemchee Cover-up Committee is really run by the Log Cabin Republicans!?
Margaret Cho on the “gay bomb”
Or perhaps this black gay man was unwelcome in NBA superstar Alonzo Mourning’s home…
That could be a reason, or none of the above is possible as well. I’m what some would call a “twofer” I’m sure I spelled that wrong but you will soon get my point. I’m a STRONG PROUD BLACK WOMAN in the GAY COMMUNITY, so I can see this from a point that some may or may not understand, I will do my best to explain. It took a very very long time for Black People to get Civil Rights in this country and God knows it was not easy and the fight is still going on in some places and of the many things I’ve learned in my life it’s PATIENCE AND PERSEVERANCE…
Never give up the fight, when I finally came OUT, I found strength within myself I didn’t even know I had, having said that I’m not saying that the Gay’s should settle, but for the LOVE OF GOD…think about some of the things that groups like “GetEqual” are doing or people like Adam “URGENT” Green and his ilk. Really people, Gay/Civil rights is going to happen because we are never going to give up the fight… but there is a way to conduct one self in SOMEONE ELSE’S HOME and going in with bull-horns- a-blazin is not the way. It’s just rude, PERIOD. There is a time and place for everything and this function was NOT THE TIME OR PLACE! Ever heard of this thing called MANNER’S? Trust me I’m the 1st to admit…I’m one big mouth broad…Lol
I’m very disappointed that Anthony Woods was not allowed to attend this function, but for people to come to all kinds of misguided conclusions about why he wasn’t allowed in is just ridiculous…Could it have been something as simple as Alonzo didn’t want a scene made in his home?
We will have ample time and other opportunities to MAKE…SOME…NOISE!
The purpose of Anthony Woods going to the event was to explain the protest the President had seen in public, on the public streets on his way to the event and on the public waterways outside of the event and in the public airspace nearby Mr Mourning’s estate. Mr Woods was a paying supporter whose check was returned.
He was shunned, after defending his country abroad. He was told not to attend, after graduating from West Point. He was told he was unwelcome, after his check had been accepted, because he wanted the opportunity, like everyone else there, to meet the president and speak his likely very brief piece.
If you don’t see that as rank discrimination and horrific bigotry, if you are you claim you are, then I really can’t help you, ma’m.
I’m sure GetEQUAL will check in with you as regards appropriate venues, you seem like just the person to pick their next one for them, with your emphasis on good manners and CAPITALIZATION on internet blogs.
Folks, it’s over.
We (I’m a hetero male, so “we” means well beyond the LGBT community) have to await the November elections.
Thereafter, we must survey the landscape for the purpose of properly strategizing the primaries against Obama in 2011-12.
President Obama is a political failure, completely and utterly. The reason, for our purposes, is that Obama, despite his obvious intellect and charisma, is even less Democratically effective than the Carter administration. It seems increasingly probable that Mr. Obama has at best negligible interest in liberal goals.
In 1980, Ted Kennedy gave Carter a good run. This time, it is rather later, so this time we gotta get it done.
It’s very serious work, but we need to find a candidate, or at least help define the vacuum of Obama such that we can shape the 2012 primary challenge that will emerge from Obama’s consummate weakness, whether it comes from within or without the Democratic Party.
The vacuum whose weakness makes a descent even from Obama seem possible is a social time-space where folks’ eyes are wide open.
Progressivism is deeply rooted in Americans. We have a base. Let’s go.
Clearly Obama thinks he won his mandate in 08 with
moderateRepublican votes.i just had to log in even tho this thread is dead and say, wow. if i ever had any doubts that the DTrippers were my enemy, i don’t now.
and yes, the GetEqual and QueerRising folks are leading the way.
Yup.
Nice to see ya.
Clearly Obama is an opportunistic closet-homophob who has no interest in being a trailblazer on gay rights. He is more concerned about his coalition than actually leading. Sad!Obama could be like FDR or LBJ, instead, he’s opted be like Clinton.