Dems use ignored rule to oust gay candidate

[IndianaGreen]

Dems use ignored rule to oust gay candidate

Alabama party committee disqualifies winner, loser in primary runoff

MONTGOMERY, Ala. - A Democratic Party committee Thursday night disqualified an openly gay candidate for the Alabama Legislature and the woman she defeated in the primary runoff because both women violated a party rule that party officials said no other candidate has obeyed since 1988.

The committee voted 5-0 to disqualify Patricia Todd, who was attempting to become the state's first openly gay legislator, and Gaynell Hendricks.

Committee chairwoman Amy Burks said earlier Thursday the party's executive committee would make the final decision and select a nominee for the seat from Birmingham's House District 54 at a meeting in Montgomery Saturday.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14505740/

[rpannier]

1. Absa...f**king...lovely

Amazing how these people (referring to the 'committee') always enforce these rules when it meets their agenda.
Talk about screwing the voters...again.

Why do we hold elections again?

[kaygore]

2. I lived in Alabama for a while in 2004

The Democratic Party would not support Kerry because they felt that if they did so, they would not be able to win state and local elections.

Alabama is another world!!! That's all I am going to say, except that if there is a rapture, most of them expect to be leaving Alabama and taking the rapture train to heaven!

Enuff said!

[Placebo]

3. They also want to disqualify every other candidate...

they have running statewide?

Insanity.

Only in the south, seriously.

[Richard Steele]

27. No, the person saying that was just pointing out their HYPOCRASY.

No candidate since 1988 has obeyed the rule that they
are using to "disqualify" her, and they all know it.
He's just pointing that out.

[Placebo]

28. Gah!

Thanks for that clarification.

[meganmonkey]

4. This is unreal. More from the link:

Must disqualify goveror, lieutenant governor candidates?
Attorney Bobby Segall told the committee earlier Thursday that if the party disqualified Todd for not filing a financial disclosure form with the party chairman it would also have to disqualify the party's nominee for governor, Lt. Gov. Lucy Baxley, and for lieutenant governor, former Gov. Jim Folsom Jr.

"Lucy Baxley is out of here. Just let the Republicans take over the state Senate and the House. Jim Folsom is out of here," Segall said in an emotional presentation to the committee. Committee members announced their decision about two hours after the hearing ended.

Committee members and party officials said the committee's decision would not affect any other Democratic Party nominees — like Baxley — because the results of other races have already been certified.

:wtf:

[proud2BlibKansan]

9. Just let the Republicans take over the state Senate and the House??

:wtf:

[rodeodance]

5. she has the AL Sup. Court on her side if she decides to fight this:

"Patricia got the most votes in two separate elections — the primary and the runoff — but party bosses didn't like the outcome, so now they want to simply handpick a candidate. What happened today in Montgomery was unfair, undemocratic, un-American and unwise," Dison said.

Another Todd attorney, Ed Still, told the committee that Todd filed her form on July 17, the day before the July 18 runoff. While the filing was in violation of a requirement that the forms be filed five days before the election, Still said the Alabama Supreme Court has ruled that candidates can't be disqualified if they file before the election.

[jseankil]

6. Can the National Democratic Party end funds to these clowns?

What type of funding does this Alabama Democratic Party committee get?

[WCGreen]

7. Chairman Dean....

Make that a 49 state strategy.....

[IndianaGreen]

8. For sure!

These "Democrats" are probably more comfortable in the segregationist South. What a bunch of knuckle draggers!

[PageOneQ]

10. Election of Alabama lesbian overturned by committee

http://pageoneq.com/news/2006/alabama_082406.html

The Democratic primary victory of Alabama lesbian Patricia Todd for a seat in the statehouse was overturned by a party committee tonight. The committee vote was 5-0. Had the committee not reversed the election, which Todd won by 59 votes, she would have become the first openly gay elected official in the state's history. No Republican has entered the race in the overwhelmingly Democratic district. Todd's race was to determine who would represent District 54 in Birmingham in the statehouse.

Todd is the associated director of AIDS Alabama, a social service and AIDS education agency.


more...
http://pageoneq.com/news/2006/alabama_082406.html

[LynnTheDem]

11. Gee how very ..."democratic".

Reminds me of 2000; fuck what the voters wanted.

[bluerum]

12. !

[HuffleClaw]

13. ???!!!

meep

[Mojambo]

14. One of these days we're going to bring democracy to Alabama. n/t

[closeupready]

15. This story underscores the wisdom of giving to local candidates,

so that you know your money will be going to pro-gay dems only.

Shame on them. :mad:

[EFerrari]

20. I agree. To both statements.

:mad:

[Botany]

16. Gutless shits

They overturned a legal vote of the people?

As a straight man I am livid .... Grow up and move on w/ your life.

I have had wonderful Gay & Lesbian neighbors and friends for years
and I really don't care about their private lives.

It is 2006 we have flush toilets, electricity, and talking picture boxes
so if a qualified person wants to serve the people ........ Damn This pisses me off

[serryjw]

18. As a straight women I am livid

How can they overturn the vote of the people? WHY didn't they just steal it?

[HuffleClaw]

82. "flush toilets, electricity, and talking picture boxes"

ahahahahhaaaa

[Chipper Chat]

17. The "Lieberman effect" maybe?

The time: 2015
The place: a civics class in a USA high school
Question by a student: "Professor Brownback, I've been reading in an old textbook about 'democracy.' What was that?"

[Freedom_from_Chains]

19. However, there is a little more too it.

"Tonight's committee vote does not mark the end of the matter. The Alabama state party chairman, Joe Turnham, told the AP he was "very surprised" at the committee's decision and a party spokesperson said the vote may be reversed by the executive committee when it meets Saturday to pick a new candidate for the seat."

So this may not be allowed to stand, which it shouldn't be, and from the rest of the article there looks like there could be several legal avenues to pursue.

[pitohui]

21. can they do that?

for shame!

[anotherdrew]

23. in a primary, yes. the committee was probably elected too

everyone remembers voting for their local party committee members right? "12 seats, 10 people running in total" "no one you've ever heard of in the news or in the local committee newsletter" - that kinda thing? It's a segment of running the party in bad need of a good web portal to manage it far more openly than it's happening these days.

[TechBear_Seattle]

22. How can a part;y committee overturn election results?

Is this legal? And if so, why is it legal?

[IndianaGreen]

24. Apparently Alabama is a bit different

another poster said that Alabama Democrats did not support Kerry at all, Bush got like 80% of the vote. I know we have very progressive people in Alabama, but they are a minority.

[LynneSin]

33. There was a rule ignored by most democrats that they punished her for

http://pageoneq.com/news/2006/alabama_082406.html

The committee disqualified Todd and her opponent, Gaynell Hendricks, because they had not filed a required campaign finance report on time. The same rule has been ignored by all candidates since 1988 and the Associated Press has reported that this year's party nominees for Governor and Lieutenant Governor have not filed the reports as well.




The hearing was held following the filing of a complaint by Mattie Childress, the mother-in-law of Todd's opponent. In the complaint, Childress claimed that Todd purposefully turned her form in late to hide from voters the fact that she had received a contribution from a gay political group based in Washington DC. Todd did turn in the finance report prior to the election. In a previous election, the state's highest court ruled that an election could not be overturned if the forms were turned in prior to election day, even if they were late.

[Spiffarino]

25. Fuck Alabama (politically speaking)

Mike Papantonio (who lives in super-red north Florida) said in a recent rant that the Dems should stop trying to win back the darkest red states of the Deep South. He said the small progressive communities there can fight the good fight and that we should concentrate on the "other forty-five."

I heartily disagreed with Pap when I first heard him say it, but now I'm having second thoughts. So Alabama wants to be run by neo-conservative bible-thumping incompetents? Let them run with it. Based on how "well" the Republicans are governing now, I suspect that a few years of one party rule will have most Alabamans rethinking their priorities.

[Bretttido]

54. Unfortunately, an extremely dark red state will spread its infectious

backward thoughts like a disease to neighboring states.

[mitchtv]

74. neighboring states like GA and MS?

already 150 yrs too late

[OKthatsIT]

26. Can they do that? Just like that?

[Canuckistanian]

29. This is why Alabama Dems will always be "a little people"

And think of the mileage that this story will get if Drudge or Hannity ever get hold of it.

Democrats purging their own party of gays and women? What's up with that?

[Rowdyboy]

30. This is a racial issue, not one of sexual orientation.This is a majorty..

black district and the local 5 Democratic party committee apparently did not want a white woman (especially a lesbian) as their representative. Hopefully, when the full state executive committee votes Saturday this disgusting abomination will be corrected.

[TechBear_Seattle]

31. The people of the district picked her, twice

And once again, a major party is telling the people to fuck off and die, they don't give a rat's ass what the people want. Color me unsurprised.

[gully]

42. No, the people within the party are exercising their right to challenge

a candidate who hid money.

[jamesinca]

51. hid money

fine if they do it on those ground, but they have not done this since 1988. They are not expelling any of the other candidates that did it this year like the Gov or Lt. Gov candidate etc.... If they do it fine, but they need to be consistent, which they are not.

[gully]

59. Has there been a challenge since then?

Either way, the fact that they did it in 88 means it's been done before. This is an attempt to recruit more log cabin republicans if you ask me. IF she hadn't done anything "WRONG" gay or not, she'd be the candidate.

[jamesinca]

69. I just don't see how this is right

They did it in '88, but not since, yet money has been hid. They are not doing it to any of the other people on this years ticket who hid money, they are not consistent. It really gives a bad appearance. The fact that they only went after the openly gay candidate will not attract any Log Cabins, it will chase them away. It won't attract any new people to the Stonewalls either. Do it to everybody or don't do it at all, but to pick one person out of several violators. To pick one person for the first time in 18 years is wrong.

I think they should have stated that 2006 will be a clean election, and held everybody to the same standard. Now they are going to let some people run and some not. So they will be an easy target, Alabama Democrat party: supports law breakers and doesn't have such a big tent after all.

[gully]

73. I didn't say it was right. The candidate says it was not about her

being gay, that's my point. We're discussing the wrong issue - the media is trying to make it a "gay" issue. If anything it's an issue of race (if we're to believe the candidate.)

My guess is that candidates will be more careful going forward? Rules are rules, just because someone else breaks and gets away with them, doesn't mean that it's ok to do the same.

[jamesinca]

86. Breaking the law or rules is not ok

Randomly applying them and enforcing them is. The Alabama dem party is wrong there, they are random, so it smacks of favoritism and discrimination. They let the straight white male go ahead, but they pull the nomination of the lesbian. Why the difference? That is where they screwed up.

This person probably will be more careful in the future, and leary of her own parties backstabbing too. With this incident, they have told her that they don't like her, get out of the party. Meanwhile the other candidates can break the party rules and are ignored.

If everybody was taken to the woodshed over this fine and if not the party needs to have a good reason. It does not matter the race, gender or orientation, they screwed up by not evenly enforcing the rules.

[gully]

88. If there were several other challenges and the same people let

it slide, you'd have a point.

However, as you likely know, it's been overturned and a "gay white woman" is the official candidate.

[Kickoutthejams23]

32. Racist Homophobic bitch. (Committee chairwoman Amy Burks)

Too white and too gay to be a democrat. Gee I'm sorry I didn't realize that our party only allowed "certain" people to run for certain districts. I think that a white woman won a "black" district is a thing we should celebrate. The overcoming of racial prejudice. The fact she is openly gay makes it an even greater victory. But instead the backward racists take out their Benjamin Moore color chart and decide the candidate is of the wrong hue. Disgusting. The committee shown be thrown out of the Democratic Party until they learn what a colorblind society really is. :grr:

[Biernuts]

41. Tripping the Rift....

Choad: "Lots of girl on girl action here."

Sex: "Choad, they're lesbians, they aren't doing it for you."

Choad: "That's what they think!"

[Charlie Brown]

34. Democratic Committee in AL use ignored rule to oust gay candidate

http://www.sovo.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=8883

A Democratic Party committee Thursday night disqualified an openly gay candidate for the Alabama Legislature and the woman she defeated in the primary runoff because both women violated a party rule that party officials said no other candidate has obeyed since 1988.

Committee chairwoman Amy Burks said earlier Thursday the party's executive committee would make the final decision and select a nominee for the seat from Birmingham's House District 54 at a meeting in Montgomery Saturday.

Attorney Bobby Segall told the committee earlier Thursday that if the party disqualified Todd for not filing a financial disclosure form with the party chairman it would also have to disqualify the party's nominee for governor, Lt. Gov. Lucy Baxley, and for lieutenant governor, former Gov. Jim Folsom Jr.

"Lucy Baxley is out of here. Just let the Republicans take over the state Senate and the House. Jim Folsom is out of here," Segall said in an emotional presentation to the committee. Committee members announced their decision about two hours after the hearing ended.

[AndyA]

35. Selective enforcement to achieve the desired outcome.

This is hypocrisy! This is disgraceful. Who should we call and complain to? I don't live in Alabama, but would be glad to do whatever I can.

[msongs]

36. can't have any lesbians in this god fearing state can we? nt

[DirtyJersey]

37. weird

This wasn't the State of Alabama disqualifying her, it was the Democratic Party of Alabama. Furthermore, this disqualified candidate is saying she's being discriminated against because she's white.

[gully]

39. The rule was not "ignored" in this case because of a formal challenge.

eom

[readmoreoften]

60. Yeah, a "formal challenge" made by homophobes. Your point? /nt

[gully]

64. A formal challenge made by "racists"

according the the WHITE challenger. Let's get our slurs right.

[dsc]

70. actually the challenger has said numerous homophobic remarks

during the period of the challenge. It seems that her remarks are more important than those of the victim.

[gully]

72. The challenger didn't file the "challenge."

"Victim?" Anyone running for office becomes a victim.

[dsc]

76. I meant challenger as in the person who filed the challenge

not challenger as in losing candidate. The challenger is the mother in law of the losing candidate.

[gully]

78. Either way, we can view the fact that she won the election in a positive

light. What happened after the win is debatable.

[LeftyMom]

87. Her family member did

Sounds like it's her challenge offered by proxy to me.

[gully]

38. I'm sure the folks at MSNBC have the best of intentions and are being

completely honest in their portrayal. :sarcasm:

A challenge filed by Hendricks' mother-in-law, Mattie Childress, claimed that Todd filed her campaign financial disclosure form with the Alabama secretary of state's office late to hide a $25,000 contribution from a national gay rights group.

So Democrats are allowed to hide political contributions now?

And get this:

‘If I was black I don't think they would have contested’ Todd said she believes the challenge has nothing to do with the fact she is gay, but is about the fact that she is white and won in a majority black district.

Perhaps you shouldn't have hid money and given them a legit reason to challenge you?

"'Of course if I was black I don't think they would have contested the election,' Todd said. She blamed the contest on Joe Reed, longtime chairman of the black Democratic caucus, who wrote a letter before the election urging black leaders to support Hendricks because of her race and stressing the need for keeping the seat in black hands."

:eyes:

[Charlie Brown]

47. looks like you alone are defending this at DU

and I think that speaks volumes. This committee's crap is more proof that bigotry comes in all forms and sizes.

[gully]

48. It speaks volumes about the fact that people respond without READING

what they're responding to.

I'm not defending it or not, I'm saying that the candidate HERSELF says it was not about her being 'GAY.' Yet, the MSNBC headline implies otherwise. Figure it out.

[dsc]

49. actually not every link has that quote

only one does and not the OP's. It is quite possible that many in this thread haven't seen that quote. I also don't take it entirely at face value. I find it beyond hard to believe that a straight, white, male or female candidate would have had that happen to them. Maybe I am wrong, but I very much doubt it.

[gully]

57. I found the quote in the article the OP linked? Perhaps it's been

scrubbed.

Also, I don't find it hard to believe that black people would like other black people to represent them?

Bottom line - the woman was said to have hidden campaign contributions, if she would have done everything "right" she'd still be the candidate.

[readmoreoften]

61. If black people want other black people to represent them, they can vote

for them, not get a win for a black candidate by manipulating an election.

[gully]

63. If white candidates run in heavily black districts knowing there is

controversy, they should abide by the rules.

[readmoreoften]

80. So should all the other black candidates who never abided by the rules.

This is disenfranchisement of BLACK voters. Black voters don't always vote for the black candidate. Most black voters vote for white democrats over Alan Keyes...

[gully]

83. If the black candidates were challenged I agree. However the

ruling has been overturned and the candidate in question is now official. See LBN

[dsc]

65. It may have been the op of your thread

but this thread has several threads folded into it. The OP of this thread, as you have seen, doesn't have that quote in it. The Southern Voice is the only link which has it. I am not contesting that the quote is accurate, I am saying that even if it is accurate it isn't necessarily a correct gage of what happened. I presume that this committee didn't just have black people on it. I find it hard to believe, close to impossible to believe, that a committee which had whites on it would have voted to remove a candidate who was white but not gay.

Black people in that district were a majority. Clearly some of them decided that she was a better candidate despite not being black. If black people wish to have black people represent them then they should vote for them. They shouldn't annul elections they don't like.

[gully]

66. The candidate should have followed the rules if she didn't want to

be vulnerable. And, the quote is on page 2 of the article in the OP. Scroll down toward the bottom of the article.

Another quote from the article.

Contacted after the hearing, Reed said he was not responsible for filing the election challenge, but he said he believes Todd should be disqualified for violating the party rule.

"The rule requires everybody to file it. The rule doesn't exclude anyone from filing it," Reed said.

[dsc]

68. because after the state started requiring forms about financing

no one, as in not a single, solitary, candidate filed that party form. Since 1988, which is 18 years ago, there have been 4 governor elections, 4 lt governor elections, 4 attorney general elections, 4 secreatary of state elections, and literally hundreds of other elections. Assuming only one candidate per election, which is clearly under counting, that is hundreds of times this rule was violated without a single warning let alone election reversal resulting from said violation.

You are purposely conflating two different forms and two different issues. The state form, which was filed late but not so late as to be disqualifying, is in fact routinely filed in these elections. Though it is also apparently routinely filed late. The form this candidate lost her seat over has not been filed even one time by any candidate since 1988. None of the at least four governor candidates filed this form, none of the at least 4 lt governor candidates filed this form, none of the at least 4 attorney general candidates filed this form, none of the at least 4 secretary of state candidates filed this form, none of the at least 420 house candidates (4 x 105) filed this form, none of the at least 140 senate candidates (4 x 35) filed this form. No one filed this form.

A slight edit here to make it more like the election example

I am a classroom teacher. Imagine for a second you had a child in my class. Imagine further that he was the only black kid in my class. Imagine further that on my classroom syllabus I had a rule forbidding students from getting up during a test under penalty of getting a zero said test. Imagine that your child video taped my final exam during which everyone, including him, walked around during the final exam. Imagine that I gave your child, and only your child, a zero on that exam causing him to be rejected by the college of his choice in favor of his white classmate. Imagine if upon your complaining my response was "Your child should have followed the rules since he was in a majority white classroom". Would you accept that as fair or just? Would I have a job the next day? I suspect highly that the answer is no to both questions.

[gully]

71. I'd have to consider what happened in your class in 1988.

Was it also a black student who was penalized at that time? However, if my child came home and told me that he was not penalized because he was black, I'd believe him. I don't think you can compare a classroom to an election by the way. Politics is dirty business, education shouldn't be.

Also, I'm not saying what happened is RIGHT, I'm saying the candidate herself says it was NOT a gay issue, and MSNBC and DU-ers are responding as though it were THE issue here.

[dsc]

75. You are assuming someone got punished in 1988

that isn't what occured. In 1988 the state started requiring those forms so candidates stopped filing them with the party. Literally no one in the history of Alabama lost their seat over this until she did.

As to her quote, it isn't dispositive, nor would your son's opinion as to my motive be. What matters here is what her opponents believed. During the race the mother in law in question repeatedly uttered anti gay slurs. She surely is a homophobe. The members of the committee have yet to explain themselves so we don't yet know their motives. My strong presumptions is that the candidate is saying it wasn't a gay thing to stay politically viable. Maybe, she believes any white woman would have been treated the same way. She has directly said a black lesbian wouldn't have. We can't know that for sure. I suspect that a black lesbian would have been tossed out too. I also suspect a white stright candidate wouldn't have. Maybe it took both white and lesbian, maybe not. But anti discrimination enforcement often looks at statistics for precisely this reason. We can't be mind readers. I can tell you that any teacher who acted the way I described would be fired or at the very least transferred to an assignment that didn't involve students.

This is no different from a company firing a whitleblower over some unrelated issue that they let others get by with.

[gully]

77. I would imagine the candidate has the same information you do, no?

She drew a different conclusion.

As for statistics, I posted about an openly gay candidate that one in Oklahoma recently, it got about two replies.

On edit here is the link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2798784&mesg_id=2798784

On of the main reasons I replied with a different view is because the OP is not a member of the Democratic party and the media and others here wish to be divisive.

Also, the candidate said it's not about her being gay, yet MSNBC is treating the matter as though there is no doubt about why she was ejected. Howard Dean has been maligned by some in the gay community recently, and this is just another attempt to piss off said community and divide IMHO.

I won't "bite" unless I know for sure that it was about her sexual orientation. And, no one knows that to be the case.

On edit: The matter has been reversed. Great news!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2477242

With today's executive committee vote, the committee vote from Thursday was dismissed. "Finally, the voters have prevailed. We are enormously proud of the courage and tenacity Patricia showed throughout this ordeal, and equally proud of her supporters in Alabama and beyond who stood by her unfailingly," said Chuck Wolfe, President and CEO of The Victory Fund.

[dsc]

81. we both have the same, which is to say none, since the only way to know

for sure is to be mindreaders. I am assuming that like me, she has no ability to read minds. Only the mindset of the people who cast the votes to undo the election can tell us that. That can only be determined by mindreaders.

[gully]

84. True, too bad MSNBC and others here responded to the mind reading

by the media.

At any rate, she's now the candidate as the ruling was overturned.

Peace

[Stuckinthebush]

53. Let me say from first hand experience

That Patricia Todd is right. I know Patricia, I know Joe Reed, and I know this district. Joe Reed was very adamant about keeping the seat in minority hands. This is a racial thing foremost, and a homophobic thing secondarily.

Joe is very powerful in the state and in the State Dem party. This bites and is going to hurt us big time.

Thanks Joe...another dumb ass move by you.

[readmoreoften]

62. Thanks for the heads up. /nt

[gully]

67. Thanks for the information.

eom

[gully]

40. By the way the candidate herself said it WAS NOT because she was gay.

But, that headline sure makes for a nice divisive tactic huh?

Hey IG what did you think of Naders belittling civil rights for gays and equal rights for women by saying "I don't do gonadal politics?"

[dbackjon]

43. Disgusting

Call them at 1 [phone]

[rinsd]

44. Something that brought a smile to my face in this otherwise dreary tale

"The hearing was held following the filing of a complaint by Mattie Childress, the mother-in-law of Todd's opponent."

"The committee disqualified Todd and her opponent, Gaynell Hendricks, because they had not filed a required campaign finance report on time"

(emphasis mine)

Something about glass houses comes to mind.

[zreosumgame]

45. and yet they won't do this to Lieberman...

[BronxBoy]

46. As a Black Man,

I'm concerned about this. Upon reading the OP, I assumed this was just another case of Alabama doing what it does. But then a few posters brought up the point that there was a race perspective to this whole thing. I did a search on Chairwoman Burks and came up with this link

http://www.bhamweekly.com/archived/pages/20060817_war%20on%20dumb.php

There were more links there and if there is more to this story than meets the eye, I'm sure some of our more enterprising members will dig into it.

But it seems that, on it's face, we have a case where certain Black political leaders had a problem with a gay White woman representing their district. A district where it seemed some Black people voted for her. I don't know if it's because she's White or if she's Gay that it's a problem. Probably both. While it's not really spoken about, Black America is schizophrenic about homosexuality. And I think that schizophrenia has led to HIV\AIDS becoming a potentially devastating member of our community. So maybe it's because she's gay. And as horrible as that is, I hope that is the case. Because if the other possibility I'm thinking about is true, then it's even worse.

If this woman was disqualified because she is White and certain Black leaders didn't want her to be elected, then Black politicians in Alabama have a serious problem. In this day and age, given the enormous problems facing our race, we need to support people who will support our needs. Period. And quite frankly, even though I'm not from the area and don't really know all of the parties involved, it seems I might favor a LESBIAN in ALABAMA over what on the face appears like a Black political entitlement, provided her agenda matched mine. If memory serves me correctly, this same shit happened in Brooklyn a little while back with one of the city councilman. I think it was Towns but I'm not sure. The challenger was White and was making a succesful appeal for Town's seat in a district with a large Black population


Shit is serious out here and our race needs to be supporting those candidates who are willing to support our goals.

[Rainscents]

50. We don't have democray in America anymore...

[Lochloosa]

52. Ava...soon you will be able to get out of that state

or stay and fight.

Sorry, the first person I thought of. http://www.peacetakescourage.com/page-home.htm

[sofa king]

55. Tap tap tap. Hello?

Hey Alabama Dems, if I wanted to support election stealing homophobes, I'd be supporting the ones who do it all the fucking time, better than you ever dreamed you could.

[Onlooker]

56. Anyone have any idea who we can write to or ...

... better yet, email. This ruling is like a throwback to the Dixiecrat mentality.

[madville]

58. I live right near the state line

I live right across the state line from Alabama in Florida, this type of thing doesn't surprise me at all. I would guess that it was a combination of her being white and gay that influenced the black Democrats on the committee to disqualify her. If she had been black/gay or white/straight this probably wouldn't have happened. Racism and hate comes from all sides around here, nobody has a monopoly on it.

[gully]

79. DEMS OVERTURN RULE AND CANDIDATE IS REINSTATED!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2477242

[Zhade]

85. YES!

Thanks for sharing this wonderful news!

[Stuckinthebush]

89. Thank the gods!

Intelligence wins!

Whew! I had just been talking to a LOT of pissed of Alabama Dems. This would have hurt the party in the State very much.

Joe Reed should be taken to the wood shed for this one...he won't be, but he should be.