Uganda's Anti-Gay Government Bans Organizations Promoting Homosexuality: "Kill The Gays Campaign" & Rachel Maddow

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Uganda Bans 38 organizations accused of "Promoting Homosexuality"

Uganda has announced a ban on 38 non-governmental organisations it accuses of undermining the national culture by promoting homosexuality.

Simon Lokodo, the country's ethics and integrity minister, claimed the NGOs were receiving support from abroad for Uganda's homosexuals and "recruiting" young children into homosexuality.

"I have established beyond reasonable doubt that the 38 NGOs, if not even more, exist not for humanitarian reasons but to destroy the traditions and culture of this country by promoting homosexuality," he said on Wednesday.

"We found that, on the pretext of humanitarian concerns, these organisations are being used to promote negative cultures.

They are encouraging homosexuality as if it is the best form of sexual behaviour."

The former Catholic priest said he believes the ban will come into a force next week. "If the NGOs continue to operate, they will be doing so illegally, they will be apprehended and will have to face a court of law."

Homosexuality is illegal in Uganda.

A bill calling for harsher penalties and outlawing the "promotion" of homosexuality, including providing financial support to gays and lesbians, is pending in the east African country's parliament.

A previous bill called for the death penalty for repeat offenders, although the new version is expected to drop this clause after international condemnation of the proposal and threats to cut off aid.

Lokodo said: "Homosexuality is illegal, unacceptable and strange to our culture. It doesn't have any positive aspects at all.

If homosexuality is promulgated and legitimised, that will be like having no future of society. There is no procreation between man and man or woman and woman. We condemn it very strongly."

On Monday he ordered the break-up of a gay rights workshop organised by the East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project at a hotel just outside the capital, Kampala.

Police wearing riot gear sealed off the venue for several hours. About 15 activists from Uganda, Rwanda, Kenya and Tanzania were questioned and later released without charge.

Police spokesman Idi Senkumbi told Reuters: "They were questioned on what exactly they were up to and the assembly they were involved in."

Amnesty International condemned the raid. "This ludicrous and senseless harassment of human rights activists has no basis in law whatsoever and has to stop," said Michelle Kagari, its deputy director for Africa.

"The continued persecution of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights activists by the Ugandan authorities is beginning to take on the sinister characteristics of a witch hunt."

Lokodo made a similar intervention in February when he stormed into a gay rights conference and tried to have one of the organisers arrested for insulting him.

Frank Mugisha, head of the NGO Sexual Minorities Uganda, said the minister's ban was part of a wider assault on civil society in Uganda. "The government is trying to use homosexuality to crack down on freedom of expression and freedom of assembly," he said. "If NGOs are closed down, they will not be able to support human rights.

"Simon Lokodo is very homophobic but it's coupled with politics. He's trying to gain popularity and make his name. The president should come out and distance himself from Lokodo."

Sexual Minorities Uganda would defy any ban, insisted Mugisha, winner of the Robert F Kennedy human rights award last year. "We are definitely continuing our operations and we will still hold conferences. We will continue to ask for the oppressive laws that are being used to intimidate us to be abolished.

"They have said they are going to pass the bill before October. That won't stop us. We shall continue to fight until all the legislation is cleared and we are free. Things are changing. It cannot be oppression forever."

Mohammad Ndifuna, the director of Human Rights Network Uganda, another of the organisations to be banned, told Reuters: "We know that they have been all kinds of threats coming towards the [NGO] sector for different reasons."

In May, Uganda threatened to de-register the British charity Oxfam over accusations it made of government involvement in violent land grabs in the country.



Uganda Anti-Gay Death penalty bill re-introduced

The Ugandan parliamentarian who first introduced an anti-gay bill that carried the death penalty for some homosexual acts reintroduced the bill on Tuesday, raising concerns among rights activists who have been fighting the legislation.

Parliamentarian David Bahati first introduced the bill in 2009 but it has never come before the full legislative body for a vote. Though widely supported in Uganda, the bill's progress apparently has been slowed by an international outcry against the bill, including condemnation from President Barack Obama.

Bahati has said that homosexuality poses a serious threat to family values and that his bill has helped raise public awareness about what he calls "the dangers to our children."

Scuffles at funeral for gay activist in Uganda
Uganda proposes death penalty for gays

Bahati told The Associated Press last year that he is willing to drop the death penalty provision if that is the recommendation of a parliament committee, though a current reading of the bill hasn't been made public.

European countries such as Sweden and Britain have threatened to cut aid to Uganda if the bill is passed.

Homosexuality, already illegal under Uganda's penal code, is highly stigmatized in Uganda. Opinion polls frequently show the bill's wide support among Ugandans. Lawmakers other than Bahati have sometimes spoken passionately about the need for such a law, and none have condemned it.

The bill has been championed by Pentecostal clerics, who warn that young Ugandans are at risk of being indoctrinated into gay lifestyles by gays visiting from the U.S. and Europe. Even pastors who oppose the draft law do so not because it is draconian or unnecessary, but rather because they believe the police would not be able to enforce it.

"I've rejected it because it does not address Uganda's homosexuality problem," said Solomon Male, a Pentecostal cleric who has been dragged to court for accusing another pastor of sodomy. "The system can't permit any good law to be enforced."

Male said that an existing law against homosexuality, inherited from the colonial days, had not been enforced.

"It is a big problem-homosexuals are in our schools, in our churches, everywhere, and we don't even know where to start," he said. "Sensitization is the best."

Bahati's original bill carried harsh provisions. The original bill would mandate a death sentence for active homosexuals living with HIV or in cases of same-sex rape. "Serial offenders" also could face capital punishment, but the legislation did not define the term. Anyone convicted of a homosexual act would face life imprisonment.

Anyone who "aids, abets, counsels or procures another to engage of acts of homosexuality" would face seven years in prison. Landlords who rent rooms or homes to gays also could get seven years.


View Larger Map


Sources: CNN, MSNBC, Guardian.co.uk, Politics Daily, Youtube, Google Maps

Prop 8 Ban Sponsors To Seek SCOTUS Ruling For Final Decision: Same-Sex Marriage Debate

Court Won’t Revisit Gay Marriage Case; May Go to Justices

The sponsors of California's same-sex marriage ban said Tuesday they plan to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review a landmark appellate court ruling that struck down the law as unconstitutional.

Alliance Defense Fund lawyer Brian Raum said Proposition 8 backers "absolutely" would take the case to the high court now that it has run its course at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Raum said he expected to get a ruling from the Supreme Court sometime in the fall on whether it would take the case. He did not know if the Proposition 8 defense team would take the entire 90 days they have to petition the Supreme Court.

The move follows a federal appeals court's refusal to revisit a decision by two of its member judges declaring the voter-approved ban to be a violation of the civil rights of gays and lesbians in California.

Backers of the ban petitioned the full 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in February to review the decision instead of appealing directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Gay marriage opponents said at the time they would go to the high court if the appeals court declined to rehear the case.

Same sex unions were briefly legal in California before voters passed Proposition 8 in November 2008. Due to the ongoing legal wrangling, it's unlikely the practice will resume in the state anytime soon.

The 9th Circuit said Tuesday a majority of its 26 actively serving judges had voted not to revisit a three-judge panel's 2-1 decision declaring the voter-approved ban to be a violation of the civil rights of gays and lesbians in California.

The 9th Circuit does not often agree to rehear cases, a procedure known as en banc review. Federal court rules reserve the practice for appeals that involve "a question of exceptional importance" or if the original decision appears to conflict with Supreme Court or 9th Circuit precedents.

After voters approved Proposition 8, two unmarried couples sued to overturn the ban in May 2009, and their lawsuit gave rise the next year to the first federal trial to examine if states can prohibit gays from getting married without violating the constitutional guarantee of equality. U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker ultimately sided with the couples.

The ban's sponsors appealed, and the split 9th Circuit panel affirmed Walker's finding that Proposition 8 violated those civil rights. But, instead of finding any gay marriage ban would be unconstitutional, the panel limited its decision to California, saying Proposition 8 improperly took away an existing right.

Several other high-profile same-sex cases also are making their way toward the high court. A three-judge panel of the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declared last week that the federal law that prohibits recognition of same-sex couples unconstitutionally denies Social Security and other federal spousal benefits to married gay couples.



LGBT donors back President Obama, big time

After President Obama announced his support for same-sex marriage, a group organizing a fundraiser on his behalf suddenly had to find a bigger venue. The event, featuring the pop singer Pink, is one of two LGBT-organized fundraisers Obama is expected to attend on the West Coast on Wednesday.

A CNN analysis of President Obama's biggest fundraisers, known as bundlers, shows that at least 33 -- or about one in every 16 bundlers -- is openly gay. Together, they have raised at least $8 million for the campaign between January and the end of March.

By contrast, in the same period, bundlers from the television, movie and music industry, some of whom attended a recent high-profile fundraiser hosted by actor George Clooney, raised $6.8 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

While campaign finance laws require donors to disclose their full names, addresses, occupations and employers, there is no box to check for sexual orientation.

Nor does the law require candidates to release information about their bundlers. Under prodding from watchdog groups, presidential campaigns have released bundler data in past elections.

Obama's campaign has released its list. Republican candidate Mitt Romney's campaign has not.

In CNN's analysis, only bundlers who have disclosed their orientation in past CNN reporting or in trusted LGBT publications were counted as gay. The Washington Post has reported that as many as one in six bundlers supporting Obama are gay. The Advocate Magazine estimates one in five.

Glancing down the names on the bundlers list released by the Obama campaign for the first quarter, it is easy to find people known for their work on behalf of the LGBT community.

Tim Gill, a software entrepreneur who runs a large Colorado-based foundation that backs gay rights projects, has already contributed $672,800 with his partner Scott Miller to the Obama for America campaign. Fred Eychaner, who owns the Chicago-based Newsweb Corp., has donated $1,220,550 so far.

He co-hosted a $35,800-per-person LGBT organized fundraiser for Obama in February. Kathy Levinson, the former president and CEO of the Menlo Park, California-based Etrade, gave $202,150.

The LA Gay and Lesbian Center Women's Night named Levinson a "Community Role Model" in 2000. She was instrumental in raising money to stop the anti-same-sex marriage law in California.

Donations made after Obama announced his support for same-sex marriage May 9 won't be released until mid-June, when the campaign files its second-quarter reports with the Federal Election Commission.

Many LGBT bundlers have maintained a close relationship with the president throughout his first term.

A state dinner in March was attended by bundlers Gill; Eychaner; Barry Karas, a former Human Rights Campaign board member; James (Wally) Brewster, senior vice president of General Growth Properties, a real estate investment trust that owns and operates shopping malls;

Dana Perlman, a corporate lawyer who has served as co-chair of the Obama/DNC LGBT Leadership Council; Joseph Falk, a Miami mortgage broker and others.

Support for Obama from the LGBT community was challenged after the initial excitement of his first campaign, largely because of what was perceived as his lukewarm support on same-sex marriage. Some say a low point came during the election in 2008, when evangelist pastor Rick Warren asked Obama how he defined marriage and he called it "a union between a man and a woman."

He added: "For me as a Christian, it is a sacred union. God's in the mix." He further angered the community by picking Warren to deliver his invocation at the presidential inauguration.

Actor Alan Cumming wrote in 2010, "We keep hearing that Obama is an ally, that DADT [the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy that kept LGBT people from openly serving in the military] will end under his watch, but what do we actually get? Diddly squat."

Dustin Lance Black, who won a best screenplay Oscar for "Milk," a movie biography of the gay San Francisco politician Harvey Milk who was gunned down because of his sexual orientation, said last year that he had been an Obama supporter before but might sit out the upcoming election.

When President Obama finally signed the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" and "evolved" in his position on marriage by saying he was in favor of it for the LGBT community, both Black and Cumming did more than just say they supported the president. They donated money. They also encouraged others to do the same.

David Mixner, who started one of the first LGBT-themed PACs in the late 1970s, said the community has come a long way in being accepted in electoral politics. "We had some candidates who wouldn't take our money back then because they didn't want to be associated with anyone who was gay," Mixner said.

He said he believes that changed with the Clinton administration, which the PAC raised $4 million to support. "Now the community knows how to raise money and contribute on their own and we are more than welcome at the table."

The LGBT community is such an important part of this president's re-election effort that the Obama for America campaign hosts a special section for it on its website. It includes a video discussing the president's support for LGBT issues narrated by actress Jane Lynch, who is openly gay.

It also offers Obama merchandise like T-shirts and drink koozies to bring to Gay Pride events this summer.

The president has already attended several LGBT-organized fundraisers, including one in New York hosted by openly gay singer Ricky Martin, the Futuro Fund, and Obama for America LGBT Leadership Council.

Another event in Washington, hosted by Karen K. Dixon and her partner, Dr. Nan Schaffer, was rumored to have raised more than a million dollars for the campaign, although the Obama team won't comment on the record about fundraising.

Tickets for one of the California events were selling so well the campaign had to find a larger venue. There also is great interest in a Chicago fundraiser co-hosted by LGBT bundlers Brewster and Bob Satawake. The couple has already raised $288,663, according to the CNN analysis.

"I think there has always been a strong base of support from LGBT people for the president," said Michael Cole-Schwartz, spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign, whose incoming president Chad Griffin is a bundler.

"He earned even more respect from the community -- from repealing 'don't ask, don't tell,' to signing the hate crimes law giving the first civil rights protection for us in federal law, to coming out against DOMA," the Defense of Marriage Act that defines marriage for federal purposes as unions exclusively between a man and a woman.

"Now, with his saying he believes in full marriage equality, we have another reason for people in our community to be generous with their time and money."

It is difficult to know if there are any openly gay bundlers for the Republicans, because Romney has not disclosed his bundler list.

The Republican candidate has, however, voiced his opposition to civil unions and supports a federal amendment to the U.S. Constitution to deny same-sex couples the right to marry.

But some gay Republicans say Romney is not totally close minded on LGBT issues. "On gay issues, where Romney stands is not as black and white as it seems," said R.

Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, an organization for gay and lesbian Republicans. "One thing he has been consistent on, as governor and as a candidate for president, is he has spoken in broad terms about ending discrimination in the workplace. He has said there is no room for it."

Cooper said the Log Cabin Republicans haven't decided yet if they will endorse Romney. That announcement will come sometime this fall. He does believe, though, that there are gay donors to Romney's campaign. They just might not be as outspoken.

"We joke that at Pride (festivals), the question we most often ask other Republicans we see there is, 'Are you out?' Meaning 'out' about your politics yet."


View Larger Map


Sources: AP, ABC, CNN, NY Times, PBS News, Youtube, Google Maps

New York City's 2013 Mayoral Candidates: Quinn & Thompson (I Endorse Thompson!)

In 2009 Billionaire Michael Bloomberg Spent more than $100 Million of his OWN Money to keep his BLACK Opponent, Democrat & Former NYC Comptroller William C. Thompson from Capturing the Mayor's Seat.

Yes Bloomberg was so Opposed to a BLACK Man becoming the Next Mayor of NYC, he even "Convinced" City Council Members to change the rules making it possible for him to Bid for a Third Term.
And after much Schmoozing & Spending of his Cash, Bloomberg Mysteriously eked out a Win.
In fact he barely defeated William C. Thompson.

Well.....
Bloomberg's Third Term ends in 2013.
Thank You Jesus!
Sorry but at this point that's how I feel.

So who will New York City's Next Mayor be?

Here are the likely Candidates:

Christine C. Quinn (D): NYC Politician (She has some of the LGBT Vote)

William C. Thompson Jr. (D): Bed-Stuy Native & Former NYC Comptroller (He has the BLACK, Latino, LGBT, Educated, Middle Class Vote)

Bill De Blasio (D): NYC Politician

Scott M. Stringer (D): Manhattan Borough President (He has the Wealthy Manhattan Voters)

And...

John C. Liu (D): Current NYC Comptroller (He has the Asian Vote. i.e, China Town)

Which Candidate do you think Democrats & the Obama White House will throw their Weight behind?

Will it be the Well-Qualified BLACK Candidate: William C. Thomspon?

Or....

The WHITE LGBT Candidate Christine C. Quinn?
Stay Tuned.


View Larger Map


Sources: AP, CUNY-TV, NY Times, Youtube, Google Maps

Educational Discrimination Still A Problem In The South! Federal Funds & Segregation

A Century Of Racial Segregation In Education 1849-1950

After the Abolition of slavery in the United States, three Constitutional amendments were passed to grant newly freed African Americans legal status: the Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery, the Fourteenth provided citizenship, and the Fifteenth guaranteed the right to vote. In spite of these amendments and civil rights acts to enforce the amendments, between 1873 and 1883 the Supreme Court handed down a series of decisions that virtually nullified the work of Congress during Reconstruction.


Regarded by many as second-class citizens, blacks were separated from whites by law and by private action in transportation, public accommodations, recreational facilities, prisons, armed forces, and schools in both Northern and Southern states. In 1896 the Supreme Court sanctioned legal separation of the races by its ruling in H.A. Plessy v. J.H. Ferguson, which held that separate but equal facilities did not violate the U.S. Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment.

Beginning in 1909, a small group of activists organized and founded the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). They waged a long struggle to eliminate racial discrimination and segregation from American life. By the middle of the twentieth century their focus was on legal challenges to public-school segregation. Two major victories before the Supreme Court in 1950 led the NAACP toward a direct assault on Plessy and the so-called "separate-but-equal" doctrine.



Imprisoned for Teaching Free Blacks

The prohibition of education for African Americans had deep roots in American history. According to the 1847 Virginia Criminal Code: "Any white person who shall assemble with slaves, [or] free negroes . . . for the purpose of instructing them to read or write, . . .shall be punished by confinement in the jail . . . and by fine .

. ." Under this code, Margaret Douglass, of Norfolk, Virginia, a former slaveholder, was arrested, imprisoned, and fined when authorities discovered that she was teaching "free colored children" of the Christ's Church Sunday school to read and write. In her defense, Mrs. Douglass noted that she was not an abolitionist, and did not engage in undermining the institutions of the South.

Upholding School Segregation: The Roberts Case

Five-year-old Sara Roberts was forced to walk past several white schools to reach the "colored" primary school. Her father, Benjamin Roberts, a black printer, filed a lawsuit against the city of Boston to integrate public schools.

In 1849 reformer and future U.S. Senator Charles Sumner represented Roberts and challenged school segregation in the Boston court. Separate schools for African Americans, he argued, in effect branded "a whole race with the stigma of inferiority and degradation." The Massachusetts Supreme Court, however, upheld segregation in a widely cited ruling. Influential Chief Justice Lemuel Shaw noted that Boston's separate schools possessed substantially equal facilities and declared that school integration would only increase racial prejudice.

The Fourteenth Amendment

The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which allowed the Federal Government to protect the civil rights of individuals, including African Americans, against state encroachment, was ratified in 1868.

The amendment also defined national citizenship and extended it to former slaves freed by the Civil War. This 1866 letter to Supreme Court Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase is from Associate Justice Stephen J. Field, whose judicial opinions would significantly influence subsequent interpretations of the amendment. Field termed the amendment, which had recently been passed by Congress and sent to the states for ratification, "just what we need" and said it showed that "the American people do not intend to give up all that they have gained by the war."

Plessy v. Ferguson, 1896

By the time Homer A. Plessy, an octoroon (one-eighth Negro blood), who lived in New Orleans, challenged that city's right to segregate public transportation by riding in a Whites Only rail car, the constitutional amendments, passed after the Civil War and written to provide protections and rights for Negro citizens, had been eroded. The Louisiana state courts ruled against Plessy, and his subsequent appeal to the U. S. Supreme Court was denied in 1896. The impact of Plessy was to relegate blacks to second-class citizenship. They were separated from whites by law and by private action in transportation, public accommodations, recreational facilities, churches, cemeteries and school in both Northern and Southern states.

The National Negro Committee, 1909

In 1908 socialist William English Walling published an exposé about a bloody race riot in Springfield, Illinois. As a result, in January 1909, an interracial group assembled in his apartment to discuss proposals for an organization that would advocate the civil and political rights of African Americans. The group decided to issue a "call" for a national conference on the centennial of Abraham Lincoln's birth, February 12, 1909. As a result of the "call," the National Negro Conference was held in New York on May 31 and June 1, 1909.

At the second annual meeting, May 12, 1910, the Committee adopted the formal name of the organization--the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Among the "first and immediate steps" listed at the bottom of this founding document is "That there be equal educational opportunities for all and in all the States, and that public school expenditure be the same for Negro and white child."

The Pink Franklin Case

The NAACP undertook its first major legal case in 1910 by defending Pink Franklin, a black South Carolina sharecropper accused of murder. When Franklin left his employer after receiving an advance on his wages, a warrant was sworn for his arrest under an invalid state law. Armed policemen arrived at Franklin's cabin before dawn to serve the warrant without stating their purpose and a gun battle ensued, killing one officer. Franklin was convicted of the murder and sentenced to death. The NAACP interceded, and Franklin's sentence was commuted to life imprisonment. Eventually, he was set free in 1919. In this letter to Mary White Ovington, Albert Pillsbury, an attorney and NAACP supporter, recommends the appeal to South Carolina Governor Martin F. Ansel.

Buchanan v. Warley

The NAACP sought out cases that infringed on the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments in order to set legal precedents and ultimately secure the constitutional rights of African Americans. An early victory was Buchanan v. Warley, a case involving residential segregation in Louisville, Kentucky. Moorfield Storey, the NAACP's first president and a constitutional attorney, argued the case before the U.S. Supreme Court in April 1917. The Court reversed the decision of the Kentucky Court of Appeals, ruling that the Louisville ordinance violated the Fourteenth Amendment.

As a result of the ruling, whites resorted to private restrictive covenants, in which property owners agreed to sell or rent to whites only. The Supreme Court declared this practice unconstitutional in Shelley v. Kraemer (1948). Buchanan v. Warley was cited in the Brown decision to challenge the legality of segregated public schools.


View Larger Map

Sources: Library Of Congress, Youtube, Google Maps

Rick Perry Will Beat Romney & Become GOP Front Runner; Victim Of Gay Smear Campaign? (Videos)

Enter Rick Perry, Formidable Fund-Raiser

When Gov. Rick Perry of Texas arrives in South Carolina on Saturday to begin his presidential campaign, he might claim any number of credentials for the country’s top office: Creator of jobs. Cutter of taxes. Defender of gun rights.

But it is a credential Mr. Perry is unlikely to highlight that could make him the most formidable entrant into the Republican primary so far: he is among the top political fund-raisers in the country, with a vast network of wealthy supporters eager to bankroll his presidential ambitions, and he has the potential to energize a Republican donor class that has shown only limited enthusiasm for the candidates already in the race.

In three campaigns for governor, Mr. Perry has raised $102 million, including more than $39 million during his successful 2010 bid for re-election. The Republican Governors Association, of which Mr. Perry is chairman, raised a record $22.1 million during the first half of this year. And in recent months, even as the candidate himself was coy about his presidential ambitions, Mr. Perry’s campaign finance operation has shifted into high gear, holding meetings around the country with dozens of the party’s top uncommitted donors, some of whom have already pledged to raise money for him.

“He is the most successful fund-raiser in the history of Texas politics,” said Craig McDonald, director of Texans for Public Justice, a watchdog organization that tracks campaign spending. “He may be the best in the country. He will have no trouble raising the money he needs for his presidential campaign.”

People familiar with Mr. Perry’s plans say that he would aim to raise up to $10 million within a few weeks of formally entering the race, twice as much as any Republican candidate except for Mitt Romney has raised all year. Mr. Perry’s top “bundlers”— supporters who gather checks from friends, family members and business associates — could be asked to raise as much as $250,000 each, though campaign officials said that hard targets were still in flux.

To jump-start his fund-raising, Mr. Perry will hold events in nine cities between Aug. 29 and Sept. 1, according to an e-mail sent to his top donors Thursday afternoon.

“We are trying to get in the first million dollars of contributions very rapidly, to give the campaign its initial capital so important to get off the ground well,” wrote George Seay, Mr. Perry’s Texas finance chairman.

“From a fund-raising point of view, he looks very formidable,” said Barry D. Wynn, a former chairman of the South Carolina Republican Party and a top fund-raiser for former president George W. Bush. “He’s battle tested with regards to his gubernatorial race. And I think a number of the people who have been pretty successful raising money for other campaigns are people he’s been able to make contact with.”

Last month, about two dozen current and potential Perry supporters met in Austin with members of the governor’s fund-raising team to discuss a potential run, many of them donors who supported the presidential bids of Mr. Bush or former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani of New York in 2008. Mr. Perry’s aides did not ask for specific dollar commitments at the meeting, participants said, but several volunteered anyway.

“A number of people just volunteered that they were going to do their part in L.A. or San Diego or Palm Beach or Philadelphia or New York,” said Mr. Wynn. “Without being asked, they said, ‘We can do it.’ ”

Mr. Perry’s strength as a fund-raiser reflects, in large part, his lengthy tenure as governor — he is the longest-serving chief executive in Texas history — in a state that is a treasure trove of Republican money and has few restrictions on political giving. And as a sitting governor, he has one advantage that the Republican field’s current top fund-raiser — Mr. Romney, a former Massachusetts governor — no longer enjoys.

In Texas, individual and political action committees may give unlimited contributions to candidates for governor, and Mr. Perry has exploited that leeway to the hilt: according to a study by Texans for Public Justice, fully half of Mr. Perry’s campaign contributions, totalling roughly $51 million, have come from just 204 donors giving $100,000 or more. A single couple, Robert Perry, a Texas homebuilder, and his wife, Doylene, who are not related to the governor, have given Mr. Perry more than $2.5 million over the years.

In a state whose government is fragmented among dozens of commissions, boards, and agencies, Mr. Perry has also raised aggressively from his own appointees, an approach permitted by state law and practiced by governors of both parties. According to Texans for Public Justice, since taking office Mr. Perry has raised more than $17 million from 921 of his appointees or their spouses.

“Democrats and Republicans have traditionally done this,” said Mr. McDonald. “But he’s taken it to a higher level than anyone else.”

In part because federal law caps at $2,500 the amount individuals can give to any one candidate during the primary, Mr. Perry will not be able to raise money nearly as easily as he has in the past. But Mr. Perry’s top donors represent a corps of bundlers-in-waiting that any of his rivals would envy.

And thanks to loose campaign rules in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, whatever money his wealthiest Texas supporters cannot give directly to Mr. Perry could easily end up in the coffers of one of the half-dozen or so “SuperPACs” — technically independent groups that in the wake of the court’s decision can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money to support a candidate — that have been set up in recent weeks by former Perry aides and supporters.

One former Perry aide, Dan Shelley, recently formed two independent expenditure groups, Veterans for Rick Perry and the Jobs for Vets Fund. Another group, Make Us Great Again, was formed with help from Mike Toomey, a former chief of staff to Mr. Perry who is now an Austin lobbyist.

Mr. Perry is also poised to make inroads among donors who had hoped to back either Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi, or Gov. Mitch Daniels of Indiana, before each man opted out of running. Many of those donors have relationships with Mr. Perry through his work with the governor’s association.

“In my time around the R.G.A., Perry’s genuinely one of the handful of governors who’s really been active nationally,” said Henry Barbour, Haley Barbour’s nephew and a lobbyist in Mississippi. “So he’s got those relationships, and I think that gives you a confidence.”

Mr. Barbour added: “When you’ve asked people for $100,000, or $250,000, or even a million dollars, you can do this at the national level.”




Next up for Mitt Romney is Rick Perry

Mitt Romney celebrated the final night of an extended summer vacation Thursday, emerging as the uncontested and still unscathed front-runner from an eight-way scrap.

That won’t last long.

The two-hour debate here, the third of the GOP presidential campaign, lacked the candidate who could ultimately present him with his stiffest competition: Rick Perry. Without Perry, and without the candidates taking any significant swipes at Romney, the forum had a preliminary feel to it — which is why the former Massachusetts governor never had to break a sweat.

Perry’s expected entry into the race Saturday will change all that.

The Texas governor may present the last best hope of beating Romney, the tenuous but still dent-free front-runner. And the remaining candidates are already scrapping furiously for a shrinking third-place spot.

Romney offered a glimpse of the race’s next phase with the observation that only he and long-shot Herman Cain “understand how the private sector” works.

“That will be a very effective message against Perry,” predicted former Sen. Jim Talent, a Romney adviser.

Romney’s high command wasn’t ready to directly contrast their candidate’s record with Perry, but they were happy to begin laying the groundwork for a campaign that will portray the decadelong Texas governor as a career politician running at a moment of maximum skepticism toward politicians.

“I think it’s very, very difficult to step into a national race and I think it’s a very difficult time to be running in your third decade in office,” said Romney strategist Stuart Stevens. “People are not looking for, ‘I have experience in government to solve government.”

Stevens also asked if Perry wouldn’t be another in a line of vaunted Texas presidential hopefuls who went bust.

“Is Perry going to be John Connally, is he going to be Phil Gramm — who knows?” he said. “It’s like a first-round draft pick — you just never know.”

Eric Fehrnstrom, another Romney adviser, cited his candidate’s private-sector experience when asked about Perry.

“I don’t want to contrast Mitt’s record with Gov. Perry or anyone else at this point except to say he has led four enterprises,” he said, citing Romney’s two private companies, the Salt Lake City Olympics and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Perry’s top strategist, Dave Carney, would only say of the debate, “There is one clear winner,” an apparent reference to the Texas governor. Perry spokesman Mark Miner declined to comment on Romney’s apparent jab.

But a Perry supporter who has led an unofficial campaign on the Texas governor’s behalf, Robert Schuman, gladly returned fire.

“He was a rancher first,” Schuman said of Perry. “And being a successful governor — as opposed to a mediocre governor — trumps being a successful businessman.”

Even as he emerged unmolested from the debate, Romney’s vulnerabilities were on vivid display earlier in the day Thursday.

“Corporations are people,” he shot back to a heckler at the Iowa State Fair, demonstrating his at-times awkward personal style that makes some in his party wince.

While he doesn’t arrive in Iowa until Sunday, Perry occupied a larger space on the stage than several of the candidates — he was even the subject of a debate question posed to three of them.

“He clearly cast a big shadow over the debate,” said Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, a longtime observer of Republican politics, who was in attendance.

Perry will loom just as large Saturday, when Iowa Republicans come back to Ames for the straw poll and the Texan announces his candidacy in South Carolina.

Some high-profile GOP officials in the Hawkeye State did little to hide their irritation over what they see as Perry’s attempt at scene-stealing.

Rep. Steve King, the influential Western Iowa conservative who is close to Rep. Michele Bachmann, suggested Perry’s timing reflects “his strategy to diminish the effect of the straw poll.”

King and other Iowa Republicans predicted that Perry’s abrupt entry and deliberate timing — the Texan will come to this state Sunday for a speech in Bachmann’s native town of Waterloo — would ruffle the feathers of Iowa GOP activists.

“To turn around the next day [after Saturday’s straw poll] and come here to Iowa and go to the very town and the very building where Michele Bachmann was raised and announced her candidacy — that’s a pretty strong statement,” he said. “That’s not going to be considered subtle here in Iowa. That might be subtle in Texas, but it ain’t subtle in Iowa.”

“It can’t help him,” King said of Perry’s bold approach to the state.

With Perry in the wings, the extended, unabashedly negative exchange that took place between Bachmann and Tim Pawlenty on Thursday demonstrated the new urgency of the undercard battle. Bachmann cast Pawlenty as too liberal; Pawlenty cast her as an ineffectual ideologue. Both are playing hard for victory in the straw poll here, and realizing the sudden reality that there may only be one ticket out of Ames.

A senior Bachmann aide, Ed Goeas, told POLITICO that the campaign sees three spaces in the race: One for Romney, whom Bachmann’s aides believe is capped at less than 40 percent of Republican support; one for grass-roots favorite Bachmann; and one for Perry, if his campaign succeeds in taking off. A Pawlenty adviser, meanwhile, argued that Bachmann has the most to lose from Perry’s entry, and that he will cut into her grass-roots base.

“The straw poll might produce the challenger to Perry,” said a former political director of the Iowa Republican Party, Craig Robinson, who now edits theiowarepublican.com. “There’s gonna be one winner on Saturday between the two of them.”

But Perry remains an unknown quantity heading into a crucial weekend. Recent presidential races have shown that highly anticipated new entrants, from Fred Thompson to Wes Clark, sink at least as often as they swim, and Perry’s strategy of competing for attention with the straw poll Saturday could also pull some attention away from one of his few clean shots at media attention.

And for all the anticipation among insiders, he remains largely unheard of in the state.

“They don’t know him,” said former Des Moines Register columnist David Yepsen. “He’s creating all this media buzz but they don’t know him.”


View Larger Map

Sources: Fox News, MSNBC, NY Times, Politico, Youtube, Google Maps

Anthony Foxx Woos Charlotte's Gay Voters: 2011 Re-election Bid & Campaign Promises

Mayor Anthony Foxx Meets With Charlotte's Gay Community


Mayor Anthony Foxx became the first sitting Charlotte mayor to hold a public meeting with the gay community Wednesday night.

"I have the real pleasure of serving 720,000 people who live in this city," Foxx said. "Every single person has a unique background."

Several community members who attended the talk at the Lesbian & Gay Community Center called it a huge step toward acceptance and equality for a city that has long kept its gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender residents at a distance.

"There is still this wide swath of conservatism in Charlotte," said Richard Thomas, chairman of the Mecklenburg Gay & Lesbian Political Action Committee. "The opportunity is phenomenal to now open that dialogue so that we can start change."

Many in the community are still angry with former Mayor Pat McCrory, who refused to send a routine welcome letter to greet attendees of the annual dinner for the Carolinas chapter of the Human Rights Campaign, a major gay rights advocacy group.

In 1995, former Mayor Richard Vinroot voiced his opposition to a city gay rights festival stating, "I don't wish to see us raise the level of exposure of the gay and lesbian movement in this city."

Teresa Davis, who moderated the mayor's discussion, drew a large round of applause when she held up a framed copy of the letter Foxx wrote welcoming the estimated 10,000 attendees at the Pride Charlotte festival in July.

The mayor covered multiple topics, including public safety, bullying in schools, and anti-discrimination policies.

Matt Comer, editor of Qnotes, a LGBT community newspaper, said the city still has a long way to go before members of the community feel included.

He and others peppered the mayor for much of the nearly two-hour conversation with questions and statements about why the city has yet to add benefits for domestic partners, like the county has done.

They pressed him to hold a public debate on the issue so that they, as voters, would know who they could support in November.

"At the end of the day it needs to be talked about. When is it going to be talked about?" said Riley Murray, 40, who lives in northwest Charlotte. "You're supposed to be our voice."

Foxx gave no firm commitments on bringing the issue to City Council or requesting a study. He said the city must consider that its budget is hundreds of millions less than it was a year earlier.

"I'm not going to sit here and say I'm going to support same-sex benefits without knowing the financial impacts," he said.

The council has debated the issue before in 2003, but City Attorney Mac McCarley said state law doesn't give clear approval for the benefits.

But a recent report from the UNC School of Government wrote that state law appears to give local governments authority to offer the benefits, though it hasn't been tested in court.

Last year, the Mecklenburg commissioners voted to offer domestic partner benefits to county workers in same-sex relationships in 2011. But it wasn't easy. Debate was heated and a public uproar ensued after Commissioner Bill James referred to fellow commissioner Vilma Leake's son as "a homo" after she discussed his death from AIDS as a reason to support the measure.




Gay Voters' Support For Republicans Nearly Doubled From 2008


Republicans made significant inroads among gay and lesbian voters in the midterm elections, with national exit polls for the House races showing that the GOP captured 31 percent of the vote of this group this year, compared to 19 percent in 2008.

The change from the last midterm elections in 2006 was not quite as large but an increase nevertheless. In 2006, 24 percent supported Republicans. Democrats' share of the gay vote rose from 75 percent in 2006 to 80 percent in 2008 and then dropped to 68 percent in 2010. Each year, approximately 3 percent of voters identified as gay, lesbian or bisexual.

"I have been very concerned over these last two years that the connection between the gay rights community and the Democratic Party is in danger of being broken, because I think expectations were set so high as a result of the 2008 election, and people are extremely disappointed," said Richard Socarides, a former assistant to President Clinton and senior White House adviser on gay rights.

Socarides said that the gay community recognizes President Obama has many pressing issues to juggle, but there's nevertheless frustration on his LGBT strategy.

"The president articulated in the early summer of 2009, when he had that event at the White House on the 40th anniversary of [the] Stonewall [rebellion] and had a couple of hundred people in the White House -- he said, essentially, give me two terms, and at the end of eight years, I will have accomplished for you what I said I would," said Socarides. "I think that some people come out of that as, we're not prepared to wait. And some people thought it was a bad strategy because they thought it was going to get harder not easier. You didn't have to be a rocket scientist to see this change coming in Congress a long time ago. So, I think that we as Democrats have a lot of explaining to do."

More conservatives have been speaking out in favor of gay rights as the issue becomes more mainstream amongst the general public, and Republicans perhaps sense some vulnerability and dissatisfaction with Democrats.

Of course, one of the central figures pushing for marriage equality is conservative attorney Ted Olson who, along with David Boies, argued the case seeking to overturn California's Prop. 8, which bans same-sex marriage. Former Republican National Committee chair Ken Mehlman made headlines recently when he came out as a gay man and signed on to help raise money for the marriage equality fight.

The Log Cabin Republicans have also been taking on a more visible role, bringing the suit arguing that Don't Ask, Don't Tell is unconstitutional. R. Clarke Cooper, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, is proud of the fact that 12 of the 17 candidates the group endorsed went on to win their races. He said he believes that the reason Republicans performed better with the gay community in this election is because of the focus on the economy rather than social issues.

"Yes, Don't Ask, Don't Tell should be repealed, so we can have open service," said Cooper. "But if people can't pay their bills or there is concern about their investments, then there could be some overriding points there."

"We want Republicans who respect individual liberty and individual responsibility and champion that as conservatives," he added. "So that's the ideal, right? But knowing there are members of the party that don't fall under that definition -- or, as I like to say, we're working on them -- our guidance was, during this campaign cycle, if you have nothing nice to say about the gay community, say nothing at all. Just shut up. And talk about issues that do affect all Americans, like the economy. Everyone needs a job -- doesn't matter if you're gay or straight."

Darlene Nipper, deputy executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, agreed that the struggling economy and larger political trends likely played a major role.

"There is enormous fear and frustration among people all across the nation, and a factor is a rocky, stalled economy and high unemployment rate," said Nipper. "When the party in power doesn't seem to be making it better, some people make their anger known at the ballot box. Is that the case here? It's tough to know for sure without people actually saying why they voted the way they did."

Socarides also said that some people who identify as gay may have been "voting more on economic issues rather than rights issues."

Among Republican elected officials, there has so far been basically no activity. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) attended a fundraising event for the Log Cabin Republicans in September, but received flack from the religious right for doing so. Besides this move, Republicans have shown little interest in making gay rights a major part of their agenda, and one of the few Republicans supporting the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) -- Rep. Charles Djou (Hawaii) -- lost his seat on Tuesday.

Cooper, who had just returned from meetings on Capitol Hill before speaking with The Huffington Post on Thursday, had more hope for progress. He said that Republican leadership staff had told him the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) would likely be taken up during the lame-duck session in the House, although the calendar had not yet been set. He added that his group was pitching ENDA -- which prohibits workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity -- to Republicans as a "pro-jobs piece of legislation."

"No one should be denied access to employment," said Cooper, "and that is a conservative talking point. I think we may have some opportunity there to gain some potential support or votes we haven't had in the past. And of course it helps we have some folks who are already in Congress, who are incumbent, who will help message that."

In the next Congress, he said the Log Cabin Republicans would be pushing a tax equity bill, to be introduced by Republican members. He also expected more Republicans and conservative Democrats to support the 2011 defense authorization bill -- which contains a provision to repeal DADT -- when it comes up, since the Pentagon will soon be finishing its review of the implications of open service for gays and lesbians.

UPDATE,

2:33 p.m.: Several readers have written in to point out that the sample size of gay, lesbian and bisexual voters for this poll was small. Liz Goodwin of The Upshot spoke with Hunter College Professor Ken Sherrill, who studies the gay electorate and said that after reviewing the full data, there was "a disproportionate drop in Democratic support among LGB voters compared to Hispanic, black, and young voters." "Though the sample size is still very small and thus there's a large margin of error, Sherrill now says the drop may be attributed to 'dissatisfaction with the pace of change on LGB rights over the past two years,'" added Goodwin.




Gay Voters Angry At Democrats Could Sway 2010 Election


Kate Coatar is seriously considering voting for Green Party candidates instead of Democrats, whom she normally supports. James Wyatt won't cast a ballot at all because he no longer trusts anyone to fight for causes important to him.

If Democratic candidates are counting on long-standing support from gay voters to help stave off big losses on Nov. 2, they could be in for a surprise.

Across the country, activists say gay voters are angry – at the lack of progress on issues from eliminating employment discrimination to uncertainty over serving in the military to the economy – and some are choosing to sit out this election or look for other candidates.

President Barack Obama's hometown of Chicago, with its large, politically and socially active gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community, offers a snapshot of what some are calling the "enthusiasm gap" between voters who came out strong for Obama and other Democrats in 2008 and re-energized Republican base voters, including tea party enthusiasts who say they are primed to storm the polls.

It didn't help that the controversy over the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy for gays erupted less than two weeks before the election, when a judge overturned it, then Obama's justice department decided to fight the judge's decision. On Thursday, the Defense Department declared that "don't ask, don't tell" is official policy but set up a new system that could make it tougher to get thrown out of the military for being openly gay.

"It's all talk and nothing's happening, and I'm just over it," said Coatar, 62, a church business manager who said she's as concerned about health care and homelessness as about gay issues. "I don't know who to vote for and the election is a week away."

Wyatt, 35, a maintenance worker at the Center on Halsted, a community center serving Chicago's GLBT community, said politicians only court gay voters at election time.

"Once they're elected, they're not fighting for things like civil unions or same-sex marriage or ending 'don't ask, don't tell' because they're hot-button issues," said Wyatt, who usually supports Democrats. "We're just used as a piggyback for them to get into office. It's absurd."

Whether or not that's the case, Wyatt isn't the only one who feels that way.

And in places like Cook County, Ill., where the gay population represents about 7 percent of voters, that could mean the difference between victory and defeat in some races, said Rick Garcia, director of public policy for Equality Illinois. One of those races is a much-watched and close battle for Obama's old Senate seat between Democrat Alexi Giannoulias and Republican Mark Kirk.

"If (candidates) can mobilize the gay community and get them out to vote, it could make all the difference in the world in some of these key races," said Garcia.

But volunteers who've been calling the 18,000 or so members of Equality Illinois to urge them to vote have been getting an earful. Many members say they won't vote or will vote against incumbents, regardless of their party affiliation or stance on gay issues.

This year's election is a stark contrast to 2008, when the gay community turned out in droves to elect Obama and help Democrats regain control of Congress.

"People were clamoring and very excited about the change that then-candidate Obama promised America," Garcia said. "Now I see lethargy at best and disgust at worst."

He said gains won under Obama, including in fighting housing discrimination, have not filtered out to many in the gay community because "the big issues have not appeared to change at all."

"But change takes time; sometimes it takes a lot of time. A lot of folks just don't understand that," said Garcia. "I am older and more seasoned, but most people are very disturbed with the administration ... and they're the hard ones to get out to vote.

"The message is huge: Don't take us for granted."

Tracy Baim, publisher of Windy City Times, Chicago's oldest and largest GLBT newspaper, and author of the new book "Obama and the Gays," said disappointment is showing up in another way: Some are refusing to donate money to candidates until they see progress, although it's difficult to gauge how much that has affected fundraising.

A message left Friday with the Democratic National Committee seeking comment was not immediately returned.

But many gay organizations are working hard to get voters to the polls, fearing they could face setbacks if Republicans retake control of Congress. Baim said Democrats and Obama still enjoy widespread support in some parts of the gay community, particularly among African-Americans and Latinos, and she believes the majority still will vote.

"People are disappointed but understand that this really is the best hope for significant change over the next several years," she said. "But at the same time, the anger is very real."

Robin McGehee, co-founder and director of the national gay-rights organization GetEQUAL calls the mood among gay voters a "disappointment canyon" but said they have no choice but to go to the polls.

She, however, is refusing to donate to or volunteer for any candidate this year. And members of her group are protesting wherever Obama appears on the campaign trail.

"We can't not take advantage of the right to vote, but that doesn't mean we can't vote smartly," said McGehee, of Fresno, Calif. "If I was a leader in the Democratic Party, I would be worried.

"Either we're important enough to fight for our equality or we're worth losing," she said. "Right now we're being treated like we're worth losing."








View Larger Map


Sources: Charmeck.org, Huffington Post, McClatchy Newspapers, WCNC, Google Maps

"I'm Not A Lesbian", Oprah Responds To Lifestyle Rumors

Oprah On Her Relationship With Gayle: "I'm Not A Lesbian"


Oprah Winfrey tears up as she talks about her relationship with best friend Gayle King as she addresses the rumors they are Lesbians.

"I have said we are not gay," she tells Barbara Walters on "A Barbara Walters Special: Oprah, The Next Chapter," airing Thursday on ABC. "I'm not Lesbian. I'm not even kind of Lesbian.

And the reason it irritates me is because somebody must think I'm lying. That's number one. Number two, why would you want to hide it? That's not the way I run my life."

But the talk show queen does say how lucky she is to have Gayle in her life.

"She is the mother I never had, she is the sister everybody would want, she is the friend everybody deserves," she says. "I don't know a better person."

Oprah gets emotional, saying, "It's making me cry because I'm thinking about how I've probably never told her that."


View Larger Map


Sources: ABC, CelebTV, MSNBC, Wonderwall, Youtube, Google Maps

"DADT Not Going Anywhere!", Lindsey Graham Speaks

Lindsey Graham: "Don't Ask Don't Tell Is Not Going Anywhere"


U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) predicted on Sunday that the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy would not be repealed during the remaining weeks Congress is in session this calendar year.

The South Carolina Republican, a proponent of the law banning openly gay service in the armed forces, said definitively that there was no support for repeal on the Republican side of the aisle. He called for an additional study to determine whether the military itself favored overturning the 17-year-old legislation.

"This is a political promise made by Senator Obama when he was running for president," said Graham, during an appearance on Fox News Sunday.

"There is no groundswell of opposition to Don't Ask, Don't Tell coming from our military. This is all politics. I don't believe there is anywhere near the votes to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell. On the Republican side, I think we will be united in the lame duck [session] and the study I would be looking for is asking military members: Should it be repealed, not how to implement it once you as a politician decide to repeal it. So I think in a lame duck setting Don't Ask, Don't Tell is not going anywhere."

Graham is, by virtue of the fact that he has served in the military (as a JAG lawyer), widely considered a leading GOP spokesman on defense matters. With respect to DADT, however, it's unclear to what extent his concerns reflect those of his colleagues. While Graham's top ally in the chamber -- Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) -- has also moved the goalposts for DADT repeal, others have been more sympathetic to revising or overturning the law. That list includes Sens. Lisa Murkowksi (R-Alaska), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and even Jon Ensign (R-Nev.).






McCain Says "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Is Working


Arizona Republican U.S. Senator John McCain criticized the Obama administration's decision to try to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy that prevents gay service members from serving openly in the military, saying Sunday that "the system is working."

"The military is at its highest point in recruitment, in retention, in professionalism, in capability," McCain said on CNN's "State of the Union." "So to somehow allege that this policy has been damaging the military is simply false."

Instead, McCain called the attempt at repeal "a political promise made by an inexperienced president or candidate for president of the United States."



His comments come as two top American defense officials are scheduled to head to Capitol Hill this week to discuss a new Pentagon report gauging the effects of repealing the policy.

McCain, who serves as the ranking Republican member of the Senate Armed Services Committee was critical of the report.

"I want to know the effect on battle effectiveness and morale, not on how best to implement the change in policy," McCain told CNN Chief Political Correspondent Candy Crowley. "I don't think that's a lot to ask when we have our young men and women out there serving and fighting and tragically some of them dying."

The study will be released Tuesday ahead of the congressional hearings where the committee will hear testimony from Defense Secretary Robert Gates, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Michael Mullen and the men who led the Pentagon review, Pentagon general counsel Jeh Johnson and U.S. Army Gen. Carter Ham.




U.S. Generals: Don't Rescind Military Gay Ban


The top uniformed leaders of the United States Air Force, Army and Marine Corps warned Congress on Friday that repealing "don't ask, don't tell" now would hurt the military's ability to fight the war in Afghanistan.

The service chiefs put themselves squarely opposed to their civilian bosses on one of President Barack Obama's top legislative priorities. The testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee was likely to bolster congressional opposition to the change.

"I cannot reconcile, nor turn my back, on the negative perceptions held by our Marines who are most engaged in the hard work of day-to-day operations in Afghanistan," Marine commandant Gen. James Amos said, citing a Pentagon survey that found 58 percent of Marines and 48 percent of Army respondents think lifting the ban would have negative consequences.

"Successfully integrating gays and lesbians into small Marine combat units has strong potential for disruption and will no doubt divert leadership attention away from an almost singular focus of preparing units for combat," Amos said.

Gen. George Casey, chief of staff of the Army, and Gen. Norman Schwarz, Air Force chief of staff, agreed.

"Implementation of the repeal of 'don't ask, don't tell' would be a major cultural and policy change in the middle of a war," Casey said. "It would be implemented by a force and leaders that are already stretched by the cumulative impacts of almost a decade at war."

Republican opponents of repeal said the Joint Chiefs' testimony confirmed their argument that lifting the ban would have negative consequences for the military.

"I will not agree to have this bill go forward, and neither will, I believe, 41 of my colleagues, either, because our economy is in the tank," said Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the ranking Republican on the Armed Services Committee. "Our economy is in the tank, and the American people want that issue addressed."

Even the heads of the Navy and Coast Guard, who said they favor repealing the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military, warned that the change must be undertaken cautiously.




View Larger Map


Sources: CNN, Fox News, Huffington Post, McClatchy Newspapers, PBS, Youtube, Google Maps