Apart from a Friday afternoon press conference with Beacon Hill insiders, Walsh hasn’t emphasized LGBT issues. It’s not as though homophobia has gone away. Indeed, Walsh’s premier contribution to LGBT equality in supporting same-sex marriage looms larger because he is believd to have defied the not insubstantial number of homophobes in his district in taking that stance. LGBT folks still are targeted in hate crimes, yet Walsh’s platform mentions no unique public safety concerns for this community (outside public schools. He blew off the questionnaire of the Anti-Violence Project of MA focused specifically on LGBT public safety issues. Most activists I know are siding with Connolly, who got the 2 LGBT newspaper endorsements.
Please share widely!
The Globe covered his LGBT platform, which focused largely on safety issues.
He’s supported by Arline Isaacson and Liz Malia, among other LGBT leaders.
n/t
I know of a handful of other LGBT people who support Walsh, but they are not activists.
In his ad in Bay Windows. Alas they style themselves as “members of Boston’s LGBTQ community when all the activist names I recognize, with exceptions like Arline and Liz, don’t live in Boston.
serving the fine community of Jamaica Plain, one of the areas in Boston recognized for a strong LGBT community.
If you didn’t know Liz Malia was from JP, you have no business talking about LGBT leaders and support.
You have just completely discredited yourself here.
For about 25 years, since she was an aide to Rep. John McDonough, who played a leading role in passage of the Dukakis era universal health care law. She was a champion in helping protect the LGBT Youth Commission from the ravages of Romney’s transphobia. At the same time, I predict JP will go for Connolly.
I look forward to you returning to normal next week.
Is absurd? How JP votes will be clear by Wednesday. And Liz did play a leading role in responding to the Youth Commission controversy of 2006.
But since you were mistaken —
Hey editors! Can you fix the hierarchy? I hate ti when we can’t tell who’s replying to who.
meant to see who voted…
The DOTOUT WebSite is still reflecting the meeting to vote on endorsements, but they voted to endorse Marty Walsh. That should count for something.
@DotOUTBoston
@marty_walsh just endorsed by DotOUT members tonight!
I know it from the email I received, but like I said, the Home Page is still showing the meeting on October 25th, and I do not see any link to the page you linked to from the Home Page.
…I just posted it as I remember seeing it come across twitter.
Walsh enjoys enthusiastic support in his home neighborhood. Still I don’t see the endorsement holding much sway in the South End, the Fenway, or JP.
has become a center of many LGBT families and individuals. I believe it will have some internal impact.
Arline and Liz–and few have done more for LGBT equality than Arline–are consummate Beacon Hill insiders who have never been involved in city politics (since the early 80’s.) And the platform talks about safety in the public schools, where many of us don’t live. What about the work of the LGBTQ Public Safety Coalition, funding for the Boston Police Civil Rights Unit, and progressive training of the not-so-progressive police patrol force? Walsh failed to address those issues, unlike Connolly.
Questionnaires don’t vote. Indeed, the support of these LGBT warrioresses is far more important than checking off a box. It’s important to keep in mind that protection against violent acts, bullying and discrimination is a civil right for every one; and that umbrella covers our members of the LGBT community. Let’s fix this for everyone in our city and beyond!
LGBT advocates against hate crimes could take it easy and not worry about police practices and training in such arcane subjects as bias indicators. A right without effective enforcement is empty.
Candidate Walsh included this in his pretty comprehensive LGBTQ platform:
http://www.martywalsh.org/issue/lgbtq
Seriously, tudor586, I respect that you have a long history of standing up for LGBT issues in Boston. But your insistence that Walsh’s commitment to LGBT issues is insufficient seems awfully poorly documented here and more than a bit of a stretch,
The Bay Windows endorsement you point to is pretty weak itself, relying almost exclusively on the St Pats parade issue. In that endorsement itself it says “Walsh’s campaign plan related to LGBT issues is impressively detailed.” It also concedes that “if you are making your decision about who to vote for on Tuesday, November 5 based solely on LGBT issues, this will be a tough decision. Both candidates have taken leadership roles in legislative efforts impacting our communities. ”
Meanwhile, the Rainbow Times counters its’ own endorsement of Connolly with this: “Undeniably, a tried-and-true friend of our community, Marty Walsh is an unabashed backer of LGBT equality.” Their three reasons for going on to support Connolly (he’s pro-diversity, pro-school and pro Gay Games) either are pretty insubstantial differences or mostly spin.
To me, both Walsh and Connolly are and will continue to be very strong supporters of the LGBTQ community. One’s decision ought to really be made on other issues.
That wasn’t in the platform Bay Windows ran two weeks ago. But who am I to complain. It would be nice if he also committed to work with LGBT anti-violence advocates like Fenway Health and the Anti-Violence Project, but I think we can give him the benefit of the doubt on that. Walsh is indeed supportive of LGBT equality. Still my prognostication is that, outside Dorchester, Connolly will win the LGBT vote in the City of Boston. The fact that Walsh used so many names of non-residents of Boston in his LGBT ad is telling.
Very few people in this state have a better record on LGBT rights than Marty Walsh. He was a leader on Beacon Hill in protecting marriage equality and was one of the first to speak out on the floor for it. He has an immensely strong record on LGBT issues at a systematic level, from bullying to transgender rights to ending workplace discrimination and so on and so forth.
As important as all of that, Marty frequently goes out of his way to speak about how important LGBT rights are to him and how his support on LGBT issues is not just one of the things he’s most proud about, but literally *the* most important thing he’s most proud about in his legislative career.
There were a number of reasons why I’ve been so supportive of Marty Walsh as Mayor, but this is one of the reasons why I’ve been so passionate about them. There is absolutely NO COMPARISON between the two in terms of what they’ve *actually done* for LGBT rights and for the LGBT community. Marty has been there for years and years, fighting for us at some of the most important levels and achieving real results.
Your sleazy deceptions about his record right here do an absolute disservice to him on one of the issues he is most strong on and discredit yourself. They do no help at all to John Connolly, the person you presumably support.
Hey, ryepower12, is the part about Connolly getting the two LGBT endorsements “pure unadulterated trash”? Or, is that not part of the “all of it” you’re referring to? Walsh has a solid record of support for LGBT issues and he was certainly there on marriage equality but the papers that tudor586 refers to think Connolly’s a better choice for mayor.
the whole aspect of how tudor tried to imply Walsh is bad on LGBT rights is pure and unadulterated trash.
People who practice deception and sleaziness will often cite sources without context to suit their arguments, as Tudor did here. Certainly, the endorsing papers did not try to imply the sorts of things Tudor has done here — that Walsh has somehow ignored the LGBT vote (he hasn’t) or doesn’t have comprehensive views on LGBT issues (Walsh’s record on LGBT issues speaks for itself).
Tudor can try to imply Walsh is not strong on LGBT rights all he wants, but it’s any and all such suggestions are pure trash and, IMO, can only be written to deliberately mislead.
I meant to write:
the whole aspect of how tudor tried to imply Walsh is bad on LGBT rights — and that is pure and unadulterated trash.
While Marty is undeniably a nice guy, his supporters bring to this campaign a malevolence worthy of the teabaggers. I don’t know you Ryepower but I can feel how much you detest what I have to say. I didn’t mean to offend you personally.There are issues facing the next Mayor that Connolly has spoken to, on which Walsh has been silent. Walsh has said nothing about the Boston Police Civil Rights Unit, the LGBTQ Public Safety Coalition, or the position of BPD liaison to the LGBT community. (Correct me if I’m wrong.) I think the public safety concerns unique to LGBT Bostonians should be forthrightly addressed. That said, Marty has support in the LGBT community that he has richly earned. I stand strong on my prediction that the LGBT vote is breaking for Connolly, in the South End, Back Bay, Fenway, Beacon Hill, Bay Village, and yes, JP. Dorchester will support its native son. Yet I agree with Bay Windows, which when it endorsed Connolly, gave high marks to Walsh.
One question I have: will Walsh march as Mayor in the discriminatory St. Patrick’s Day parade?
He hasn’t marched in the St. Patrick’s Day parade for a long, long time and there is zero chance he will until the parade ends its discriminatory ways.
Further, if you hold the fact that he ever once did against him, then surely you’ll hold it equally against Connolly, who also has marched in the St. Patrick’s Day Parade in the past.
Walsh’s opposition to the parade’s discriminatory ways, especially as a “native son” of DOT and Irish immigrants, means a great deal to the LGBT community.
Obviously neither candidates will march in the parade until it changes its ways. Your implication here can can only be explained as a further example of attempting to willfully mislead on your part.
based on what I’ve read in Bay Windows. They said Walsh said he would march but insist that the Allied War Veterans let the gays in. Connolly marched in the past but won’t anymore. I think the symbolism of the exclusion of LGBT people from the city’s premier parade tells us a lot about how far we have yet to go. If you think the issue is unimportant, I disagree.
until the discrimination ceases.
What is controversial about that? It is all activists have ever asked for re: the parade.
I’m sure Connolly would be willing to march in the parade if the parade ended its discriminatory policies too, as well as he should.
1. Where have I ever said that, and 2) in light that I haven’t, why would you even say something like that? Of course I think it’s an important issue. Both candidates are taking the appropriate actions by boycotting the parade; there is no risk that they’ll change course until the discrimination ends.
Should the discrimination end, it would be more important than ever to ensure LGBT organizations and allies have an incredibly strong presence in the parade — and I would expect *both* candidates to be there, marching with LGBT organizations and/or LGBT supporters, to emphasize to the bigots that we’re here and we’re not going away.
through all the brickbats you throw my way. If discrimination ceased, then everyone should march! I take it you have more recent information on the subject than the Bay Windows story earlier this fall?
This has been established all year long. You think Walsh suddenly decided he’d march despite the discrimination, even though Connolly’s the one out on the trail with Ed Flynn?
Paranoia strikes deep.
Bay Windows reported of Walsh: “He has marched in the traditional St. Patrick’s Day parade, citing “tradition”, but says he would “demand” organizers include LGBT groups.” This is the link: href=”http://http://www.edgeonthenet.com/index.php?ch=news&sc=local&sc3=&id=149875&pf=1″ target=”_blank”>
years ago. So did Connolly. They both stopped, they both say they won’t march until the parade ceases to discriminate. Connolly’s the candidate campaigning with the parade’s organizer, who wrote a letter supporting him. If I’m not mistaken, he’s the candidate who marched in the parade more recently of the two.
Walsh’s clear position on this (I won’t march so long as the discrimination continues) does not go away just because Bay Windows runs a brief article that is as loose with facts as Connolly himself.
It’s about your double standards.
It should be down there, in reply to ryepower.
But boy do I wish the stupid parade issue would go away. Does the mayor have the power to refuse them a permit until they stop discriminating?
This went to the Supreme Court in the mid-90s, which ruled unanimously that the organizers have a right to exclude because they control their “message.” It wouldn’t be possible to deny a permit.
Not saying that the current St Patrick’s day parade is as egregious as a KKK event would be, but surely there must be some point at which we could just say no?
In any case, what is their “message” exactly? Celebrate your Irish heritage but only if you aren’t gay?
People with reprehensible causes get to march because this is a free country. Nazi, KKK, Westboro Baptist, etc.
The only way the parade will stop is if the good Democrat diehards of South Boston turn their backs on it and vacate the streets rather than enable the hate. Good luck with that.
for the facts about Skokie. Yes, the KKK could have a parade here.
Downrate for the comment about the “Democrat diehards.” Seems to me the people in Southie who support the discrimination aren’t so diehard. They have been more than willing to vote Scott Brown, Romney, etc. It’s the reddest neighborhood in Boston.
Your guy Mitt was working with them, and against the vast majority of Massachusetts Democrats, to eliminate marriage equality. At the 2005 breakfast, Romney: “There’s nothing wrong with our supreme court in Massachusetts that having Wacko Hurley as chief justice wouldn’t cure!”
The parade issue can go away as soon as the organizers allow gays to march. In all reality, you may be looking at 1 or 2 LGBTQ related floats and they would fizzle out once the novelty wore off. If armed soldiers of the Galactic Empire can march, so can actual Irish LGBTQ. The only thing I want banned from that parade is the Union Jack
If redcoat regiments can march in Patriots Day and Independence Day parades, both of which I have seen, certainly a Union Jack can be in an Irish parade as well:)
Just no.
I’m so old I can remember when it was OK to imply, falsely, that the Pioneer Institute had endorsed Connolly.
if someone says the name of an instition, another person can’t make the deduction that naming the institution was a reference to the institution’s members or board or employees?
You’re right in a very literal sense that the Pioneer Institute didn’t literally endorse Connolly (as an organization, they can’t), but certainly the vast majority of people associated with Pioneer are supporting Connolly to some degree or another, particularly the large donors associated with the organization.
I haven’t always seen you be so literal in the past. For example, I didn’t see you complaining when people came out and said “Wall St.” was against Liz Warren, when in a very literal sense a street sign is unable to make an endorsement.
is used as a metaphorical reference for big business. Its figurative meaning is well-understood. The Pioneer Institute, on the other hand, has no metaphorical connotations, though it clearly has such vehement detractors that those merely associated with it bring scorn upon the entity.
“though it clearly has such vehement detractors that those merely associated with it bring scorn upon the entity.”
It’s not about literalism, it’s about your double standards. Play by one set of rules, please, and don’t hair split over things like my alleged literalism.
It seems to me more saying that Walsh is not emphasizing the issue that much in his campaign and has (or had) left some issues out of his platform.
You are reacting as if tudor totally trashed Walsh on the issue and it does seem to be a bit of an overreaction.
but a lighter touch might be more effective here, no? If you’re going to argue that tudor586’s statements here are morally repugnant, free from reality, and dipped in stupidity, then you are just inviting tuder586 to bang heads with you for the rest of the thread because there is no honorable way for tudor586 to concede a single point to you. Also, for those of us who are spectators to this battle, we’re going to root for you only reluctantly just because of the over-sized negativity you’ve brought here.
It’s not as if tudor586 is Tom Friedman or Joe Lieberman with significant influence. He/she is an anonymous poster on BMG, and a long-time member of the community here.
and I want to stress I am far from “trashing” Walsh on LGBT issues. We have an embarassment of riches in this race–so different from 1983. In the context of LGBT public safety concerns, I think Connolly has done better outreach. And for whatever reason the LGBT vote outside Dorchester seems to be trending toward Connolly– a point best illustrated by the Bay Windows and Rainbow Times endorsements.
My reply would have been very different, and mainly served as a reminder that a newspaper endorsement isn’t the same thing as evidence of a community’s majority support.
You reaction was in now way proportional to tudor’s rather mild criticism of Walsh’s LBGT position.
Tudor’s criticism has hardly been mild. The parade issue is a case in point. We have a situation where both candidates marched in the parade years ago, both stopped, and Connolly’s hitting the stump with the parade’s organizer, all while his campaign is “testing the message” that Walsh is anti-LGBT because he marched in the parade 10 years ago.
Then Tudor comes here and says, “Oh, I think Walsh is just waiting to win the election to resume marching in the parade.” All this because a Bay Windows article said he marched in it years ago and conveniently omitted that Connolly did the same. And because he said, “I’ll demand an end to discrimation and march if it ends,” instead of “I won’t march unless the discrimination ends.” Grasping at straws here.
The other accusation is that Walsh hasn’t addressed violence issues facing the LGBT community. Except that, when it becomes clear his platform does so, the assertion is, “Oh, nobody supports him outside of Dot.” As if the LGBT community of Dorchester is going to support a guy who’s going to let them get beat up because he lives in the same zip code.
When it’s pointed out that Liz and Arlene support Marty it’s, “Oh, but they deal in state issues, so they don’t count.” Again, not a lot of respect. A state rep whose district is in Boston is pretty well aware of city issues. And Tudor admits that “few have done more for LGBT equality than Arline,” but somehow thinks that Arlene will support a guy who won’t protect the community from violence.
Tudor’s posts and comments have come with a strong whiff of suggestion that a Mayor Walsh doesn’t mean what he says and would be bad for the LGBT community, insulting Walsh himself and his supporters in the process.
You are overcharacterizing my mild comments. The fact is Connolly has done better outreach to assure the LGBT community that he understands their unique public safety concerns. Walsh’s platform now mentions police training but not the work of the BPD Civil Rights Unit or the LGBTQ Public Safety Coalition. That’s a far cry from saying he is indifferent to gay-bashing. I appreciate the clarification on the parade–
I merely pointed out an ambiguous statement in Bay Windows. There are no polling data to corroborate my perception that LGBT voters are breaking for Connolly in the downtown neighborhoods and JP, but I have been a keen observer of the LGBT electorate since the 80’s and called the gay vote for Weld in 90 and 94. But I could be wrong. I reserve my scorn for the likes of Scott Brown and Ted Cruz–Walsh is clearly a friend who has earned the LGBT support he enjoys.
this is the kind of brazenly misleading statements you’ve made that makes me terribly frustrated about the HR Kevin’s of the world when I’ve called out your BS. I’m the bad guy for saying mean things about lying, according to them, while your lying and/or acts of deception go uncriticized.
Tudor, if you did it once or twice, I would accept it as an honest mistake and apologize, but you are clearly attempting to deliberately mislead and only walk a step back if you’re called out for your falsehoods or unsubstantiated accusations — and then even as you retreat, you choose new grounds for further deceptions, like you’ve done here with your attempts to hoodwink anyone into thinking there was any ambiguity.
What you do is far more damaging than my lack of patience of your deception. If tudor can’t admit he was wrong without descending into some other maddening act in rebuttal, then I’ll continue to call out his BS. And it is BS.
There is no ambiguity to, “I’ll demand an end to discrimation and march if it ends.”
Period.
and you bite my head off. You’re reading your own perceptions into my words. What is dishonest about pointing out that Walsh hasn’t made clear his views on the BPD Civil Rights Unit or the LGBTQ Public Safety Coalition? If I’m wrong, you should point to contrary evidence not make undetailed accusations? Has Walsh talked about the CRU or the LGBTQ Public Safety Coalition.
If Walsh wins I hope he’s a lot more magnanimous than you are Rye power. Otherwise he’ll be presiding over a sharply divided City.
And I “bite your head off” (aren’t we one for the dramatics) after it’s clear these loaded questions, straw men and types of misleading statements are a pattern, including in this post I’m responding to by bringing up a straw man – intimating that all you were doing was x y or z when you know very well I clearly referred to your misleading statements about the parade (again), which you don’t even mention.
you get called out in one area for which you can no longer hold your ground, your shift to some other area, as slippery as a snake, to make some other argument, instead of admitting you were wrong. That is not a winning argument. It’s a straw man.
It is pretty clear that your characterization of tudor’s comments are unfair.
It is also clear that you are very quick to take huge umbrage at even the most minor criticism of Walsh and are just as quick to throw mud at others.
You are totally entitled to your opinions, but I don’t think that your demeanor has reflected well on you, and I don’t think it is helping your cause.
Tudor for his deceptions and apply some degree of consistency to your criticisms. Surely, willfully misleading people about a race is worse than calling out the lies and BS of that person. If you can’t bring that level of consistency to your self-appointed role of BMG referee, then I’m frankly not interested in hearing about it.
I would love for everything here to be all sunshine and rainbows, but I’m not going to sit idly by as someone repeatedly misleads others, up to and including claiming there’s some level of ambiguity over a statement as clear as this, “I’ll demand an end to discrimation and march if it ends.”
Supplant Walsh for Connolly in your sentence and you have your role for the entirety of this campaign.
You can’t critique us as uncivil for nitpicking about semantics when that’s all the Connolly supporters are bringing to the table. Minitue about the parade is what Tudor introduced to this discussion and Kevin still can’t define what the meaning of ‘teacher’ is.
This entire thread has been a massive diversion from areas of real policy differences between the candidates. Let’s hash those out instead
Kevin’s not for either candidate. It’s just coincidence that Kevin takes offense at every defense of Walsh or criticism of Connolly.
Kevin identified one issue of concern (FiOS) and I pointed out that Walsh’s website specifically addresses it and Connolly’s, as far as I could see, doesn’t. Response: I expect nothing from either of them on this issue.
Marty Walsh has been derided by the MSM and Connolly’s supporters on this site as a union lackey who will destroy the city’s finances (despite taking a stance against the union on the two labor-related issues to arise in that period). Meanwhile, nary a peep about the Fenway Center developers asking for over $8m in tax breaks.
Tudor comes on here and suggests Walsh and his supporters are anti-intellectual and insinuates that the BPD won’t protect LGBT citizens on his watch before pulling it back when challenged. DaSox1 says Walsh’s intelligence is at a Sarah Palin level.
Connolly himself has called people who call out his resume distortion “birthers,” while running a poll that all but accuses Walsh of racism and homophobia, on the basis of past participation in a parade the organizer of which was out in the streets with Connolly last week.
But I’m the one with the tone problem.
Stop mischaracterizing my views.
A teacher is someone who teaches. Its as simple as that. Not sure why you think I am confused about that.
Connolly was indeed a teacher, but not a career teacher and perhaps not a very good teacher for that matter. I do not feel in any way deceived by Connolly claiming he once was a teacher, but I don’t give him any credit for it either. Whether he didn’t teach at all or was a 10 year veteran, it really makes absolutely no difference to me. I am just not as outraged as you want to be over an issue that I really don’t care about. Sorry.
BTW, it is entirely possible that some of Connolly’s ads may have given someone an impression that he has more teaching experience than he really has. Hopefully people have paid enough attention to the campaign by now that they know the truth.
I did not quote the sentence you quote and call it ambiguous. I referred to a statement in Bay Windows.
in Massachusetts and arguably the nation as floor whip on the gay marriage vote. This trumps anything Connolly has done for the community. Dorchester is also Boston’s largest and most diverse neighborhood, with significant Irish-American, African-American, Vietnamese-American, and LGBT communities. The insinuation that 2000’s Dorchester is 1970’s South Boston is offensive. Walsh has been comfortably returned to the House ever since he first won election over one Martha Coakley by these constituents.
It has a vibrant LGBT community and has had as long as I’ve been here. It’s diversity is legend. I would point out that marriage is not the only LGBT rights issue on our much-maligned “agenda.” Lots of us are unpartnered. My work focuses on public safety, and I give an edge to Connolly there. I mean no disrespect.
Marty’s LGBTQ platform-
Support for LGBTQ seniors-
Globe coverage of Marty’s plan to protect gay youth-
Malia/Peake endorsement
LGBTQ issues are addressed in his Elders policy-
His public safety platform-
His women’s platform-
Bay Windows knocked Marty on his stance on Transgender issues, on which I call bull. He’s the only one of the two candidates who ever had to VOTE on that issue, and he voted the right way. The legislature was criticized because they couldn’t get to 100% of the bill that activists wanted. Fair enough. But, should they have walked away without ANY bill? Anyone who thinks that doesn’t really understand how legislation is made. You take what you can get, when you can get it, and then you go back next session and get the rest.
People have very short memories. The campaign has lots of loyal support from the LGBTQ community, from people who remember the extent to which he has been there for them over the past two decades.
I don’t seem to know how to paste the links. Sorry.
Go to the issues page and see for yourself, if you’re interested in seeing the volume of work he has actually done on the issues directly related to LGBTQ issues.
http://www.martywalsh.org/issues
Walsh was not part of the cabal that stripped public accommodations out of the trans equal rights bill. Indeed I find very little fault with Walsh’s platform in its current iteration. I think his outreach to the LGBT anti-violence community was less extensive than Connolly’s. But you can be sure anti-violence advocates from our community will reach out to the BPD under a Walsh Administration. DC, NYC, and Providence have seen upsurges in anti-LGBT hate crimes in the past couple of years-Boston must remain vigilant.
The faux outrage is getting tiresome. We get it-you guys back him, we back Walsh, and at the end of the day we will get a Democrat as Mayor. Rye was not being pushy or uncivil, he was simply pointing out that the endorsements by the LGBTQ papers seemed to imply critiques of Walsh’s record that are simply not there.
At the end of the day there is a vast chasm between the candidates on labor, education, quality of life, income inequity, and corporate influence in government. There is literally no chasm on LGBTQ issues-they agree 100%. The only real difference is Walsh fought longer and tougher fights in the legislature, but to be fair, had Connolly been in the State House instead of the council I am sure he’d have been on the right side too. They are both replacing one of the earliest and proudest equality Mayors in Menino who was pushing marriage equality while Clinton was signing DOMA, and should either candidate win I am sure that legacy will only continue.
For what it’s worth I attended a wedding of a good friend in Chicago over the summer, and she and her wife enjoyed their two years in Dot and are backing Marty.
n/t