Gay Patriot Header Image

Finally Revealed: Members of “No on 8” Exec. Committee

Given the eagerness with which gay activists supported Barack Obama’s presidential bid, let us hope they take heed of one of his first initiatives as president.  He has promised greater transparency in government, committing to making “his administration the most open and transparent in history.

Now, months after reporters tried to find out who was serving on the “No on 8” campaign’s executive committee, intrepid and persistent blogger Michael Petrelis “found and published” the names of the the 16 ‘principal officers’ on that committee.  It doesn’t seem to include any Republicans* and reads like a Who’s Who of the gay left.

They kept this list under wraps for the duration of the campaign. Can you imagine the outcry if a political candidate kept secret the names of his campaign team?

By hiding the names, they made it much more difficult for us to hold them to account for failing to defeat Prop 8.  Par for the course with these guys who would rather attack their adversaries than engage in introspection and figure out what went wrong with their campaign.  Seeing Lorri Jean, chief executive of the Los Angeles Gay & Lesbian Center, on the list, the LA Weekly‘s Patrick Range McDonald reminds us that she:

was incredibly quick to divert all attention away from the failures of the “No on 8” campaign — which were many — and point the finger at the Mormon church. Jean, if you remember, first started the Mormon backlash on Wednesday, November 5 at a rally in West Hollywood, whipping people up and announcing a demonstration at the Los Angeles Mormon Temple on Thursday, November 6. She continued with her anti-Mormon rant for the next several days whenever she could grab a microphone.

Guess these people would rather attack their adversaries than admit their mistakes or promote their cause.

*I’m still looking into this.  I have not been able to confirm that there are no Republicans on the list, but those I know are clearly on the left of the political spectrum and others work for left-wing organizations.  I was able to find that of the names with which I was not familiar, a few had given to Democratic candidates.  If you have any evidence to contradict my assumption that there are no Republicans or conservatives on the list, please let me know.  Thanks.

Share

6 Comments

  1. I’m not sure where you’re going with the “no Republicans on the committee” thing. No GOPers so no blame, or no Republicans helped could be bothered to help us retain our rights?

    Anyway, the names of these folks should be sounded loudly from one side of the state to the other, if not coast to coast. This was the worst example of comfortable, insider politics assuming that they could relax and not fight the lies and hatred emanating for church pulpits and talk radio. They lost us marriage rights and p*ssed away a ton of money. The (lefty) sites (unless you consider Rolling Stone a conservative publication) that have listed out their failures need as much exposure as possible.
    And, GPW, you may need to handle two thoughts at once here, but just because a commander fails to adequately defend a city from attack when it could have been defended doesn’t mean it wasn’t under attack. The Mormons did fund and organize a huge initiative to strip us of marriage rights. It doesn’t mean that we couldn’t have won, of course, but it doesn’t make the lies they told about kids learning about gay marriage in school and preachers being arrested any less disgusting. Guess some bloggers would rather attack their political adversaries than admit we have enemies.

    Comment by torrentprime — January 22, 2009 @ 8:51 pm - January 22, 2009

  2. torrent, your response makes pretty clear you don’t read my posts.

    With “no Republicans on the Committee” thing (as you put it), I am suggest thatthose who organize these committees, largely the left-leaning gay leadership, don’t reach out to the Republicans in our community (a point I’ve made repeatedly on this blog). And once again, torrent, state recognition of marriage is not a right, but a privilege.

    I do know that lefties sites have listed the failures of the “No on 8” campaign. Heck, I linked one in this very post, maybe two if you count Patrick as a leftie. Nice guy he is, but conservative he is not.

    And quit your insults, ok? I handled more than two thoughts at once in this post. It’s you who didn’t get the point of that reference. The point is this, and it comes from the aforementioned Patrick, once again, hardly a Republican he, that Lorrie Jean would rather attack Mormons (like much of the “No on 8” “leadeship”) than admit her own mistakes.

    Of course, I’ve said this before, but you don’t seem to bother to read my posts, only to skim them so you can find something to attack.

    And no, torrent, Mormons aren’t our enemies. They just disagree with gay activists on some issues. And until you get that point, you–and others like you—should be disqualified from the debate on gay marriage.

    But, we live in a free society where we must tolearate the speech even of the ingorant.

    And I’m going to criticize my political adversaries when I see them offering silly arguments and engaging in juvenile tactics rather than making serious arguments.

    Wow, I’m sounding a little harsher than I normally do, but I want to promote a conversation on this blog and you’re clearly not interested in such an even-handed exchange.

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — January 22, 2009 @ 9:07 pm - January 22, 2009

  3. The reason such “attacks” work, torrentprime, is because leftist gays like dressing up children as sex slaves, taking them to sex fairs to “show off”, and claiming that it is an “educational experience”.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 22, 2009 @ 9:45 pm - January 22, 2009

  4. McDonald’s blog entry ends with this tidbit:

    Equality California will be hosting an “Equality Summit” in Los Angeles on Saturday, Jan. 24,but it’s not open to the general public and the organization has set certain rules for how journalists can cover the event. Many of the “No on 8” leaders will no doubt be in attendance. [Emphasis added]

    What arrogant a**holes these people are!

    I think the worst thing about this is that while these losers have been hiding behind their shroud of secrecy, even small-amount private donors to the Yes on 8 campaign have had their names published; some have even been hounded from their jobs!

    Comment by Classical Liberal Dave — January 23, 2009 @ 1:01 am - January 23, 2009

  5. He has promised greater transparency in government, committing to making “his administration the most open and transparent in history.“

    Didn’t we get a similar promise from the liberals of the 110th Congress, of which Chairman Obama was a participant? We’re still waiting.

    Hell, Bush provided more transparency than Obey et. al.

    but it’s not open to the general public and the organization has set certain rules for how journalists can cover the event.

    Sieg Heil, baby!

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — January 23, 2009 @ 1:40 am - January 23, 2009

  6. I think outside of the issue of reaching out that maybe part of the problem with having a board made up entirely of people from the left side of the spectrum is that it essentially cut out the conservative perspective on the issue of gay marriage.

    Perhaps leaving out the conservative side of the debate led to some poor decisions and the passage of the proposition.

    Comment by just me — January 23, 2009 @ 2:03 am - January 23, 2009

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.