Gay Patriot Header Image

What’s NGLCC’s Beef With Wal-Mart?

Posted by ColoradoPatriot at 10:04 am - July 13, 2007.
Filed under: Advocate Watch,Economy

I’m not ready to impugn the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce for their recent decision to scuttle relations with Wal-Mart, the hugely successful American company the Left can’t help but to hate. I’m not ready to suggest that perhaps the NGLCC is just another far-Left organization disguised as a gay advocacy group.

I’ll wait to see what I get in reply to the letter I just wrote to co-founder Justin Nelson:

Subject: Wal-Mart

Mr Nelson:

Recently your organization published a press release in which you announce your “membership with Wal-Mart that will not be renewed.”

Last August, you issued a press release praising Wal-Mart for, among other things, its “ongoing commitment to advancing diversity among all of its associate, supplier and customer bases”, and portend the inclusion of the corporation as you work together toward “providing a diverse workplace and creating mutually beneficial relationships with the LGBT and LGBT-friendly business community.”

In fact, you personally are quoted in the release as saying: “We are honored to have Wal-Mart’s support of the NGLCC. Our partnership will not only provide more opportunities for the NGLCC, but the business community as a whole.”

I know you take seriously the responsibility to our community that goes along with your position, and that you do not make these decisions casually. As a member of the gay community, I trust that your group is serious about those with whom it associates and wouldn’t engage with a corporation (especially one as large and transparent as Wal-Mart) without first ensuring its gay-friendly bona-fides. Your recent abrupt decision, therefore leaves many questions:

After less than a year, have you uncovered something about Wal-Mart that you didn’t know last August when you had such praise for the company?
Has Wal-Mart undertaken a drastic reversal of its diversity program?
What has Wal-Mart done differently in the past 10 months that has changed your mind about their commitment to the gay and lesbian community?

I, as well as the readers of the blog for which I write would be interested in knowing the answers to these questions, and look forward to your response.

All the best,
Nick, ColoradoPatriot

I’ll keep you informed as to what I hear back.



  1. Simple – the GayLeftBorg sees Wal-Mart as aiding and abetting “breeders” and their progeny without regards to other segments of the population. Such deviation from the diversity policy is, to them, unacceptable.

    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — July 13, 2007 @ 11:25 am - July 13, 2007

  2. Two words: organized labor.

    What I really would like to do is to demand that, since NGLCC is so willing to do the bidding of leftist unions, they make it a requirement of membership that all businesses who wish to join be unionized.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 13, 2007 @ 12:29 pm - July 13, 2007

  3. Frankly, I don’t think you can tell from the press release who’s not renewing the membership, the NGLCC or Walmart. Your assumption that NGLCC is to blame is unsupported. If they respond to your letter that Walmart declined to renew, I trust you’ll let us know.

    Comment by Ian S — July 13, 2007 @ 1:19 pm - July 13, 2007

  4. Thanks for bringing this to our attention, Nick. I am very interested in hearing more about the reasons for the abrupt termination of the relationship between Wal-Mart and the NGLCC.

    And, Ian, I suppose (in your world) there is a sliver of ambiguity on the face of the press release concerning which party made the decision to terminate the relationship, but I’m putting my money on the NGLCC having made that decision. I think it’s a good bet because if it was Wal-Mart that decided to cut ties with the NGLCC, you wouldn’t have needed Nick’s post to hear about this. You would have been alerted to it by every gay rights group in the nation through press releases peppered with the usual laundry list of accusations used against corporations like Wal-Mart: discrimination; bigotry; homophobia; etc.

    As usual, NDT, I think you’re on to something. Your instincts on these matters are unimpeachable.

    Comment by Sean A — July 13, 2007 @ 2:47 pm - July 13, 2007

  5. Please tell Dan he’s been tagged.

    Comment by Kobayashi Maru — July 13, 2007 @ 3:34 pm - July 13, 2007

  6. Didn’t AFA claim a few weeks ago that Wal-Mart was the one to drop this? Of course, they claimed it was due to their massive boycott (lol), but they said the decision came from WM and not the NGLCC. More AFA spin, I assumed…

    Comment by torrentprime — July 13, 2007 @ 3:56 pm - July 13, 2007

  7. #6 Thanks torrentprime, I remembered something like that. Here’s more from late last year in Wing Nut Daily:

    The change, according to Mona Williams, vice-president for communications at Wal-Mart, will have the company evaluating on a case-by-case basis its support for outside groups.

    Many have criticized the company’s decision to join the National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce and contribute $25,000 to its operating budget, as well as a $60,000 contribution to another homosexual organization to sponsor a conference.

    Such contributions are unlikely in the future, Williams told WND, … We will not make corporate contributions to support or oppose highly controversial issues,” Williams told WND.

    Gee, it sounds like Walmart with their membership now up for renewal decided to kowtow to AFA and not renew its membership in a “highly controversial” group like NGLCC.

    Comment by Ian S — July 13, 2007 @ 4:42 pm - July 13, 2007

  8. According to a July 2 piece on

    “We are not currently planning corporate-level contributions to GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender) groups,” Mona Williams, the company’s senior vice president of corporate communications, said in an interview with Fortune magazine.

    It’s interesting how a tiny bit of research can uncover actual facts. Of course, not doing research allows folks to make ignorant claims about the “GayLeftBorg,” so I guess there’s something to be said for that.

    Comment by JonboyDC — July 13, 2007 @ 4:57 pm - July 13, 2007

  9. Of course, Ian, you could read the rest of the article.

    Those “blanket contributions” to “gay” groups won’t continue, but, “we would look for opportunities to partner with them in areas we could support,” Williams said, such as initiatives that support equality in the work place.

    If it doesn’t impact business, there’s no reason for the company to take a position and contribute financially, she said.

    “I think we will do all of these on a case-by-case basis, and we would not rule out partnering with the (“gay”) chamber on specific projects,” she told WND.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 13, 2007 @ 10:30 pm - July 13, 2007

  10. #9: So Walmart won’t “rule out partnering with the (”gay”) chamber on specific projects”. Well, you of all people ought to understand exactly what that corporate-speak translates to. And what else is a membership other than than a “blanket contribution?”

    Comment by Ian S — July 13, 2007 @ 10:50 pm - July 13, 2007

  11. It means exactly what it says. They have not ruled out partnering with the gay chamber of commerce.

    And what else is a membership other than than a “blanket contribution?”

    “Blanket contribution” would be a no-strings-attached gift.

    A membership, especially in a chamber of commerce, means you show up, contribute, and participate.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 14, 2007 @ 8:12 pm - July 14, 2007

  12. who cares if Walmart partners with the gay community or not? (actually I’m a bit disappointed NGLCC ever did). Wal-Mart is one of the biggest coporate puveryors of bringing down wages, benefits and the standard of living in this country. I’m all for making money and no, I’m not a communist, but seriously, how mch more money do these mulit-millionaires through billionaires need to make? geez, you can spread a little around and still make a big profit.

    Comment by Kevin — July 15, 2007 @ 2:21 am - July 15, 2007

  13. NDT is absolutely correct… I bet this was organized labor. I’ll be sending my own email to the local Gay Chamber of Commerce.

    Comment by Eva Young — July 15, 2007 @ 9:50 am - July 15, 2007

  14. I think I’ll call Walmart about this also… The World Net Daily article is interesting.

    Comment by Eva Young — July 15, 2007 @ 10:00 am - July 15, 2007

  15. Quick update, folks:

    I got a response from Justin Nelson the very day I sent this email (how ’bout that?!).

    I’m on vacation right now, so don’t have a lot of writing time on my hands, but I’ll be posting it and my response in the next day or two.

    Nick (ColoradoPatriot)

    Comment by ColoradoPatriot — July 16, 2007 @ 12:56 am - July 16, 2007

  16. geez, you can spread a little around and still make a big profit.

    Which they do.

    Wal-Mart’s figures indicate that of the $273 million it gave last year in the U.S., about $250 million was in cash. The rest – $23 million – reflected in-kind donations. Its employees and customers donated another $100 million.

    Nationally, Wal-Mart was ranked as the top cash donor in 2005 by The Chronicle of Philanthropy, a newspaper that tracks corporate charitable giving. While the 2006 numbers have yet to be compiled, the publication’s spokesman Evan Goldstein, said Wal-Mart is expected to retain its ranking.

    “They’ve been on the top for a number of few years now,” he said.

    Of course, you wouldn’t understand this; as studies show, people like yourself who demand forced income redistribution and punishment of the successful are far less likely to give to charity and far less likely to engage in altruistic acts.

    In short, the government does your charity for you. And Nancy Pelosi and her leftist thugs love that, because it allows them to take money from you and use it to buy votes for them.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 16, 2007 @ 1:33 pm - July 16, 2007

  17. Why, when the evidence clearly demonstrates that this was Wal-mart’s decision, do folks continue to post as though the NGLCC is at fault here? And why has this piece still not been updated to note the incorrect factual assumption that was made when it was posted?

    Comment by JonboyDC — July 18, 2007 @ 1:12 pm - July 18, 2007

  18. I get so tired of the Leftist Union attacking Walmart. They can’ t get over the fact that the employees don’t want “union thug”s” telling them what is right and what is wrong. I worked in the Retail Industry for 30 years. Target, Rite Aid (which is Union), Kmart, Walgreens, Longs Drug store’s and most other similar pay very similar wages, and the Health Benifits are the same. All the Union Thugs want is more “lemmings” following them over the cliff. Rocklingar

    Comment by gary — July 18, 2007 @ 9:05 pm - July 18, 2007

  19. And exactly how are unions relevant to a story about Wal-mart caving in to the AFA by ending the company’s relationship with the NGLCC?

    Comment by JonboyDC — July 18, 2007 @ 11:12 pm - July 18, 2007

  20. It’s now 11 days since this was posted. Are you ever going to let us know what you heard from NGLCC or correct the clearly erroneous factual assumpton underlying this piece?

    Comment by JonboyDC — July 24, 2007 @ 1:15 pm - July 24, 2007

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.