Obama Names 7 Gays to Transition Team

[Hissyspit]

Source: Gay News

Obama names 7 gays to transition team

November 29, 2008 (2 hours ago) by Gay News

Officials with President-elect Barack Obama’s transition team this week named at least seven openly gay people to transition panels assigned to review federal departments and agencies.

Three of the seven gays named to the transition panels — businessman Fred P. Hochberg, former San Francisco Supervisor Roberta Achtenberg, and labor attorney Elaine Kaplan — held high-level positions in the Clinton administration.

The Obama officials also named President Bush’s former ambassador to Romania, Michael Guest, to a transition panel assigned to review issues pertaining to the State Department. Guest became the nation’s second openly gay ambassador when Bush appointed him to the Romania post for a term lasting from 2001 to 2003.

Several national gay rights advocacy groups, meanwhile, were said to be considering whether to hold one or more gay-related events during the week of Obama’s Inauguration on Jan. 20.

Read more: http://www.gayguidemiami.com/inthenews/politics/barack-obama/obama-names-7-gays-transition-team

[rosesaylavee]

1. Good news

K & R

[TheWraith]

2. Whew!

Melody Barnes isn't one of them. Good. My crush can go on unaffected. :)

[crusoe]

3. Change is evident

It's welcome change that homosexuals are seen as equal to their heterosexual counterparts when it comes to jobs.

[hlthe2b]

8. Wow... Crusoe didn 't last long...

:shrug: What happened?

[yardwork]

10. Possibly a sockpuppet of a formerly banned DUer.

If you're banned from DU and attempt to come back using a different user name, the mods will automatically delete your new account if they catch you.

Skinner gives amnesty to many who ask, but those who attempt to sneak back in get tossed back out right away.

[hlthe2b]

12. Must have been...

I wonder if EarlG has some kind of automated search to have caught up so quickly...Whew..

[yardwork]

15. I have no idea but the admins definitely have sophisticated stuff...

[davidinalameda]

20. they get it from the CIA

don't tell anyone

[Fearless]

41. Nah, you just need the IP address.

[Frisbee]

45. Might check IP addresses. n/t

[empire we are]

37. Interesting how

"free" speech is edited on the Internets, yet so many bitch about bias and editing on MSN.

[yardwork]

54. This is a private site with specific rules. You're welcome to leave if you don't like them.

[rhett o rick]

4. This might be enough to make the heads explode of the right wing shock jocks. We can only hope. nm

[bluedawg12]

5. Excellent! Good start.

[last1standing]

32. Yes it is.

I'm glad to find that President Obama is thinking of our concerns from the beginning.

And on a personal note, thanks for being there when I needed encouragement a few weeks ago, Bluedawg. It was appreciated. :hug:

[TheEuclideanOne]

6. I hope he didn't include Les Nesman

[Myrina]

7. ... anxiously awaiting the day that this would not even need a headline ...

... when America regularly lives up to her promise of liberty, justice and the pursuit of happiness for ALL, without the need for watchdogs or reminders of who we have overlooked or excluded.

[yardwork]

11. I was going to say that but I figured it would sound ungrateful....

[Fearless]

39. It did for me.

:)

[lebkuchen]

13. right--who cares if they're gay, as long as they believe in the rule of law

unlike so many in Bush's administration.

[NewJeffCT]

16. It would be great if it didn't need a headline

but, I'm afraid that won't happen in my lifetime. However, a lot of progress has been made in my almost 42 years.

[jhrobbins]

30. And the progress made in my 57 years is stunning.

[Fearless]

40. Hell the progress made in the past 5 years even...

Well, we're getting there.

[awoke_in_2003]

25. I don't blame you...

but as things like this become more common place, that day will occur sooner.

[Journeyman]

49. My first thought as well, but given the tenor of the times, it's undoubtedly best. . .

this fact be given play, if for no other reason than to show the bigots we won't be cowed, but also to show the nation that people of many diverse makeups can perform essential tasks well. Sad to say, but the simple adage "people are people" has to be proved over and again.

[cliffordu]

9. K&R

[Zuiderelle]

14. Wonderful! K&R

[Ian David]

17. Oh.... I hope they were "Out" before he named them. n/t

[GentryDixon]

18. Good on Obama.

It is about time somebody stood up to the rabid "Conservative Christian Right" to make a statement about the meaning of equal rights and the "Land of the Free"

[terrya]

19. Excellent news! Kicked and Recommened!

:thumbsup:

[ksimons]

21. one day it won't matter, but for today, it's great news!

eventually, it'll be 'uh, ok' LOL can't wait!!!!

[denem]

22. "held high-level positions in the Clinton administration" ?

Bah, humbug. The DLC is taking over! BBEETTRRAAAAAAYED AGAIN!!

[Mad_Dem_X]

23. Great news! nt

[Fearless]

24. Sigh...

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today."


So, it's nice and all that he did put gay people on his committee. I only hope that they have talent and aren't token placements. Sorry if I don't go with the crowd on this one. But we're not carnival freak shows and I'm in a lousy mood.

[Hekate]

28. Tell ya what: next time Obama does something we deem praiseworthy, tell the MSM to ignore it...

... so we won't even know he did it, and some here at DU can go on complaining that he STILL doesn't walk on water and he WON'T turn water into wine for the Inaugural Ball so screw 'im.

How's that for a plan.

Hekate

[Fearless]

29. Actually I am a proud supporter... since Kucinich dropped out at any rate...

I wasn't talking about media reporting, which has actually increased very favorably nationally for the GLBTQ community since the passing of Prop. 8, my post was remarking on how tired I am with people remarking that we're all categorized solely as "gay" or whatnot. I would rather a competent group than a token gay one (not saying that this one will be, and hoping that it won't) as such actions are extremely demeaning to our movement.

[DutchLiberal]

26. Wow, that's so much better than supporting same sex marriage...

[liberal N proud]

27. Next thing you know, there will be gays everywhere in the Cabinet

:sarcasm:

I can hear some uneducated, uninformed moron saying something to that effect now.

Just as Obama was elected on his qualifications and intelligence and just so happens to be black, I would imagine that is just how these candidates were also selected and they just happen to be gay.

We are getting closer to a society where such things as race, gender or sexual orientation no longer matter.

Of course the Christian Right will always demand religious purity and battle against those who don't fit their ideals.

[Fearless]

38. The non-religious equivelent of AMEN to that!

[qwlauren35]

64. Please note the source of the article.

The fact that the article is coming from the Gay Media suggests that the GBLT community is pointing this out and that media is oblivious to the orientation of these appointees because, to the rest of us, the appointees are simply more, competent people being added to the team.

I agree with whomever said that there would be moaning and groaning if it didn't appear that he had chosen any openly gay experts for his team, and now there is moaning and groaning because someone is pointing it out.

Choose yer battles, folks.

This wouldn't be one of mine. I love hearing that black people are considered competent and worthy. It doesn't happen often enough, yet. Keep in mind that having a black POTUS is still a rare anomaly... and that if Obama f&cks up, we're not going to have another one for several centuries.

[emlev]

31. That's 7 out of 300 people appointed, according to the article

So unless there are also approximately 23 closeted gays also appointed, that's still under-representation. Better than nothing, to be sure.

[Laughing Mirror]

34. Honestly

And no cabinet positions, to boot.

Yet they consider this such groundbreaking progress I guess.

Could have fooled me.

[Deja Q]

36. Well, if Obama is into spite he'll sack the current 7 and not be bothered.

Maybe more gay people need to do or be interested in what he wants for his various positions, no double entendres intended?

[MannyGoldstein]

42. Your 10% Figure Is Likely High

Most surveys find 2%-3% of the population is homosexual, e.g.,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_sexual_orientation#Modern_survey_results

Which would make 7 of 300 about right.

[Posteritatis]

60. Right or wrong...

I don't exactly think I'd want the executive branch to be populated by a perfect microcosm of American society at large. That'd mean four-tenths of the president's staff and cabinet officials would be creationists as the most obvious example of educational problems.

(To be fair, I think it's great that the president's been reaching out like this, though. I was astonished - in a good way - when he put "gender identity" into the won't-discriminate-based-on list for the transition team.)

[TommyO]

62. Thank you for parroting the anti-gay right-wing talking points.

[Phred42]

33. but are they conservative Gays or Progressive gays?

:rofl:

[Deja Q]

35. WHo he picks to hire the job is because he believes they will do the job well.

I don't give a damn if they're gay, hetero, white, black, brown, yellow, pink, or even from the planet Cheron:

[AZBlue]

43. While that's great, I look forward to a day when appointments aren't labeled by their

race, gender, sexual preference or anything else but name and abilities or experience. That is true equality.

[Greenheron]

44. Hoover

J Edgar Hoover anyone.Seriously, who cares what their sexual preferences are.I want to know where they stand on issues!

[Frisbee]

46. Agreed...

I couldn't care less if his appointees are 0% or 100% gay, or anywhere between. We need competence and integrity more than anything else right now. If those people happen to be gay, great. If not, as long as they are quality appointments, I'll be happy. But, all things being equal, it IS nice to see that he has no qualms about appointing a gay person when he feels they are the right person for the job.

[IndianaGreen]

47. You can't marry another gay or lesbian, but by all means, do some chores around here.

Let's cut the crap, President-elect Obama, and get on with the program. This is the 21st century!

[RCinBrooklyn]

48. Not impressed. Policy changes will impress me. He's been silent on Gay Rights/Prop 8..

[Hekate]

51. We already had several knock-down drag-out fights about Obama supporting gays. He does.

For the past two years we had this fight here. Barack Obama supports gay rights. Demonstrably so. Do the research with his organization.

As for Prop 8, a lot of us were blindsided by it and we weren't running a presidential campaign. Prop 8 will not stand. What do you want the president elect to do at this moment? It's on its way to the courts. He's dealing with the entire country crumbling and the economy melting down. He's appointing people right and left, some of them out-GLBT, and you are not happy with that.

I have no patience.

Hekate

[Zuiderelle]

55. Two days before the election Obama said "I am against gay marriage. I believe marriage is between a

man and a woman." I haven't heard him say anything different since the election, so I'm still awaiting to see how his position has changed, if at all. 7 openly gay members of his transition team is a start, even though it represents only a fraction of the ratio that gay American citizens make up. Even the LOWEST estimates of how many gay Americans there are are much higher than the 2.3% that 7 out of 300 team members represents.

[Hekate]

57. Okay, so you want a quota system and not affirmative action? Just asking...

... because that is what you have described. I know the difference, having spent 11 years as a county affirmative action commissioner.

I. Have. No. Patience.

Hekate

[Zuiderelle]

58. No, I want fairness. I want to be represented fairly. Just as a woman, I deserve to be fairly

represented by women. And you should know better than asking an idiotic question like that if you were a county affirmative action commissioner.

[primavera]

61. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you...

... but it kind of sounded like you were saying that you felt that, for you, as a woman, in order to be "fairly represented," you needed to be represented by women. Is that right? So if I go into a hospital, as a man, should I refuse treatment from nurses because so few of them are men? I'm not sure I'm following your reasoning here. I think we share the goal of a discrimination free workplace in which people are free to engage in whatever occupation they wish without constraint, but I don't think one can measure our progress towards that happy outcome simply by comparing percentages of women in the population against percentages of women within any given occupation. What if few women want to become construction workers? Should they be compelled to become construction workers whether they like it or not in order to achieve statistical symmetry? Likewise, is proportionate representation in each and every occupation a meaningful indicator of gay equality in our society?

[Zuiderelle]

63. Your answer is idiotic.

And you know it. I refuse to converse with someone who uses such ridiculous arguments.

[ima_sinnic]

50. & somebody's sexual orientation has WHAT to do with their capabilities?

so we can all relax now with the delusion that "change" is happening?
who gives a flying f*ck what "groups" the DLC parades around to make themselves look "hip" and 21st-century?

are these gay people any more interested in prosecuting bushit war criminals and ending the folly wars in the Middle East than straights?

[Zuiderelle]

56. You seriously don't see how important it is to have any representation of an entire segment of the

population of this country who are currently fighting desperately for simple equality?

[lunatica]

52. The question is does the gay community feel represented

I feel that this is progress for the gay community. Nevertheless the irony is pretty heavy in that gays can serve openly in government but they still aren't equal under the law. They still can't serve openly in the military and they're the only group of people who have to fight to NOT lose their rights.

But it's the government, when used as it should be that creates that equality so with gay people in the government it's really only a matter of time.

At this point in time I'm grateful to learn specifically that gay people have been selected and as a country of diversity it's good to know if our government represents all of us. I want to know how many Muslims and Agnostics and Atheists are appointed and I want to know how many of them are women, gay and of what racial minority. And I sure as hell want to know how many open bigots and racists are appointed. It's only fair.

I think we need to know all these things just to know we're all represented, above and beyond the novelty value. As an American I'm proud that gays are in Obama's Administration.

In the last 8 years we've seen how progress can be undermined by those who would take our rights away. We should always be vigilant of our rights so I want to always know that we are all represented openly. I think that if we get to the day where we're complacent and don't feel it's important to point out our uniquenesses in getting appointments we'll get another Bush administration which will gladly take our rights away, one group at a time. So I hope that we let it be commonplace but that we don't ever let it be unimportant.

[tomp]

53. as long as they're not left-leaning gay people...

:evilgrin:

[CatholicEdHead]

59. Great News!

/waits for AFA and Catholic Answers/Ave Maria to blow a multiple gaskets over this. :evilgrin:

[Vidar]

65. Bravo, Obama, Bravo!

[Eryemil]

66. Until he actually does something that matters I won't be holding my breath

The ball is on his court now. I waiting.