All the minority outreach positions were eliminated, so why the specific outcry?
I'm an Indian-American, and would have no issue with this.
If anything, a lot of these "outreach" positions encourage segregation of different groups to a certain extent. And many groups are sidelined as a result. We become, in my case, "Indian-American" Democrats. But like other communities, we're not a homogenous community, so why are we treated that way.
I'm a Democrat for many reasons besides my race. And that's how I want to be treated.
Also see the diary/comments at:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/2/3/1 94140/2006
my biggest fear is losing focus on a number of topics. The fact is that different communities are facing different challenges, or have different concerns. Hispanics may be more concerned with immigration and ESL training, african-americans with community violence, and so on.
Another fact is that homosexuals are seriously under attack right now, more than any other single group that I can think of. It seems as though each week brings another state or national bill outlawing gay rights of some sort. And they pop up even more frequently during election season.
It's not that GLBTs want to be specially treated, it's just that without a STRONG public commitment to their efforts, politicians seem to find it quite easy to distance themselves from the cause. (this has also been happening with the pro-choice movement lately)
Hopefully, Dean and the DNC are correct, and this will better unify the party. I'm willing to give the Guv the benefit of the doubt, since I support so much of what he's doing. But I'm watching!
"Focus" is the key word here, IMHO. You cannot focus on everything under the sun (pun intended!)... the 2006 election won't be about ESL or community violence or even civil rights for gays (including marriage benefits)...
In 2006 we need to get out the vote, including the various factions that vote D in large swaths. But should each group get teo or three staffers dedicated to that segment? I don't know... that's a lot of staffers! Can you imagine if the GOP had a pair of staffers for each flavor of radical Christianity that swings their way? Not sure if the DNC would be getting bang for the buck.
So far I'm inclined to throw this in the 'tactical decions' bucket, and in that area Dean has been a very strong performer so far. Now, if I get the sense the the DNC is abandoning gay civil rights, that's another thing. but i do't think that's what this is.
I see where you're coming from.
But I wouldn't worry about it. I think it is an improvement, for all groups. It makes everyone an equal partner in the ultimate goal and brings everybody together, as opposed to someone on the fringes with an outreach director.
