Can GOProud Do Something Meaningful in the DADT Debacle?

Like lobby and call on it's members to call Sen. Scott Brown's office to urge his vote for the stand alone DADT repeal? Since he didn't actually, you know, vote FOR DADT repeal like he -- and GOProud -- said he would.

Or will they continue to just take useless potshots meant to do nothing more than stick a finger in the eye of gay progressives?

GOPricks

The boys at GOProud have endorsed the Senate Republican strategy of blocking action on anything other than the Bush tax cuts -- including repeal of DADT.

Do we really need another "gay" organization that puts political party interests ahead of our equal rights? The left has HRC, the right now has GOProud.

Of course, the real mission of GOProud isn't to advance gay rights. And perhaps not even to advance conservative causes. I think their real mission is to piss off gay liberals.

GOProud. The Gay Republican Hope?

After bemoaning the lack of progress on gay issues from our Democratically controlled federal government, James Kirchick writes:

If liberal gays truly value legal equality over political partisanship,
they will wish groups like the Log Cabin Republicans and GOProud tactical
success in changing the GOP from within.

Well, yes, I wish them well. But I question whether changing the GOP from within is really the goal of GOProud. It seems to me they're more about giving conservative gays a social club from which to bash Obama. That's okay, being gay doesn't mean you're going to be for health reform or against torturing detainees, much less chanting "yes we can" at political rallies.

But providing a safe haven for gay conservatives within the GOP doesn't necessarily translate into working for change from within. A look at GOProud's federal legislative priorities suggests they are not on a mission to do what Kirchick hopes for.

Out of 10 "priorities," two are related to gay issues. One is opposition to a federal constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. Well, how very 2004 of them. The fight today is DOMA repeal.

They also support repeal of DADT, and good for them. However, if they are "working from within" to deliver any Republican votes on DADT repeal I haven't seen any evidence of it. A review of their news releases doesn't reveal any evidence of their having successfully lobbied any GOP support in Congress on DADT repeal. They tout their founding, promote market based health care reform, promote the right to carry concealed weapons and brag about their sponsorship of CPAC.

One could argue -- and Kirchick does -- that their sponsorship and visibility at a prominent conservative gathering is a good thing. Visibility is important and their presence certainly highlighted the generational fissure in the conservative movement on gays. But again, did it result in any additional support in Congress for DADT repeal?

I agree philosophically with Kirchick. I don't think it's wise for gays to blindly support Democrats and see the gay movement as of a piece with the Democratic Party. But as long as the GOP's base of votes and money is southern and evangelical I don't see how it's politically possible for a small group working within to affect real change. And as far as I can see, it doesn't seem like they're trying all that hard.

GOProud of its Schadenfreude

GOProud -- the new gay Republican group -- is crowing that it was right that health care reform would discriminate against gay couples because of DOMA.

Since they don't actually do anything to build libertarian support in the GOP for a DOMA repeal or any other equal rights policy, one gets the feeling they're quite happy, if not giddy about this fact.

But then, it's also curious that while they rail against health care reform because of it's DOMA-based discrimination, they do not include actually repealing DOMA as one of their federal "legislative priorities."

GOProud is just silly and represents the worst of politics -- partisanship for partisanship's sake, only with a rainbow flavor. Which doesn't excuse it.

Obama's First 100 Days -- the Gay Perspective: Rainbow High

The Washington Blade (DC's weekly gay newspaper) headline this weekend is:

"High Marks for the President's First 100 Days"

The WashBlade asserts that "many activists" are "awarding President Obama high marks for his work in leading the country and addressing LGBT issues during his first 100 days."

The "activists" in question are leaders from HRC and the NGLTF.

Joe Solmonese lead activist of the Democrats HRC, would have praised Obama for moving on action items for the first 100 days his group submitted during the transition, including developing a plan to roll back Don't Ask Don't Tell. If Obama had actually moved on them (he hasn't). How Solmonese can give the administration"high marks" for not doing anything his organization asked him too seems a bit of a stretch. "Heckuva job, Brownie," anyone? Oh -- "high marks" Joe did praise Obama for appointing gay people to high positions. Okay, so Obama did the same thing my boss did -- he hired some gay folk.

I'm an Obama man and I give him high marks for his first 100 days. But not on gay issues. There his record is woefully incomplete. I'm willing to give him time -- and he's had a lot of things to deal with -- but history and our gay rights organization's tendency to think they're front groups for the Democrats instead of civil rights activist organizations makes me nervous. Their reaction to his inaction reinforces my nervousness. I think a more realistic analysis of his record on gay issues is 0. Here's the chart to prove it.

But let's look at the Gay Republican analysis of the first 100 days.

Jimmy LaSalvia, who is executive director of GOProud, a new gay Republican group, said, according to the Blade:

Obama has been a "disappointment" in the White House and gave him a "d-" for work on LGBT issues.

Right. Because you know that if the GOP was in control, DOMA and DADT would have been repealed long before now.

Jimmy, how would you rate Michael Steele's moderation of the Republican Party? How would you grade the GOP's ability to see that aligning itself with Evangelicals makes it a regional Party unattractive to moderate and younger voters in the 160 some days since the 2008 election. How is your attacking the President helping you move the GOP to a more libertarian position?

My wish list?

Gay "activists" who don't turn into apologists for disappointing Democratic politicians and Gay Republicans who understand their real problem is Evangelical base of support in the GOP. In this dream world Democrats would be held accountable for their pro-gay promises from the left -- and anti-gay opposition from the right would be weakened.