Who Benefits From the Dana Beyer ‘Campaign’?

Hint: It isn’t trans people.

Carrie Evans, executive director of Equality Maryland, the state’s largest LGBT advocacy group, questioned Beyer’s intentions, as the battle to pass Madaleno’s antidiscrimination bill rages on. “We really are questioning the timing of her announcement,” Evans said in a statement to the The Baltimore Sun. “We need to all be focused on getting this bill passed.”

Granted, I will – and all trans people should – always question the intentions of the former Free State Just Us.  But, this passage – from what used to be the Advocate – begs two questions:

(1) If Evans actually can be taken at her word about the former Free State Just Us’s desire to actually see the Maryland political hate crime of 2001 rectified in 2014, then what does this say about Beyer’s state of mind (on any number of levels)?

(2) Even if the former Free State Just Us is still just the same old Free State Just Us and the ‘push’ to rectify the Maryland political hate crime of 2001 in 2014 is just a scam, then can Beyer actually be delusional enough to believe that she can knock off someone of Madaleno’s political heft who the same old Free State Just Us is going to be behind?

As I’ve stated earlier, even if I was in Maryland, I wouldn’t necessarily be in Madaleno’s corner – but as with all of the occasional threats (never carried out) to run a trans person against St. Barney in the Massachusetts 4th….

well, unlike St. Barney, I actually do know what Oz looks like.

Translated: Even if I couldn’t bring myself to vote for Madaleno, I wouldn’t be placing a bet against him.

The Dana Beyer ‘campaign’ doesn’t seem to be Oz.

The only yellow-hued bricks I see aren’t painted; they’re urinated-upon….

and they’re surrounded by purple bricks.

Jenna Fischetti poses a third begged question:

Seems exceptionally problematic. Why does one go against the lead sponsor of the trans bill 4 days before the hearing?

Might one have an interest in perpetuating one of most damaging stereotypes of trans women?

One that, like the St. Barney/Toronto/Colorado/yadda yadda yadda penis parade, also doesn’t exist but which Gay, Inc. – and its bought-and-paid-for subsidiary that claims to be trans organization – uses with great effectiveness to discredit all politically-minded trans people who don’t abide by the Gay, Inc. script?

Herding cats…

Screaming trannies…

Whisper, whisper, whisper, whisper….

As Vanessa Edwards Foster wrote a few years ago – after a decade of being a pin-whisper cushion:

While I’ve never given much belief in vampirism, it’s certainly coincidental that the trans community with all its initial energy and talent typically ends up burning out quickly, leaving us with husks of former leaders.  While many gay and lesbian leaders have long, productive careers and lives, typically only the rare trans individual manages to survive similarly.

Forget the never even being considered for employment that would allow one to do one’s activism as a full-time job – instead of in addition to a full-time job.  The precursor is the institutionalized, defamatory discreditation of trans activism in general – and in particular the trans activists who not only dare to look behind the purple-n-yellow curtain but have the audacity to tell all of those who are being lied to, LGB and T alike, what is going on behind it – by Gay, Inc.

But now…

Madaleno, who is gay, reported to state campaign officials on Jan. 13 he has more than $36,000 on hand. Beyer on the same day reported her campaign has roughly $364 in the bank.


I wouldn’t attempt a round-trip drive across Iowa with only $364 in the bank.

Has Gay, Inc., found a lesser class of clown who is willing – or who is too moronic to understand that she’s volunteering – to be a real-life embodiment of every ‘those people are too unreasonable to deal with’ slander that more than a few in HRC’s inner circle have made a living by disseminating?

I don’t know.

But I seriously believe that more people need to be willing to ask who stands to benefit from such a ‘campaign.’


  1. I can’t really imagine that EQMD is really that big a player in the race. LGBT people aren’t that large a part of the electorate & EQMD’s PAC likely doesn’t have all that much cash. They won’t spend it all on a Senate race, especially as they’ve got a Gov race to consider. One where they didn’t endorse the lesbian candidate, if memory serves.

    It’s not my backyard – so I can’t say I’m really familiar. But – Dr. Beyer hasn’t yet tipped a hand to any traditional strategy for challenging an incumbent in a primary.

    Usually there’s something obvious – vast ideological differences – lack of basic competence that can be exploited – redistricting changing support – demographic changes or ethic/racial representation issues.

    She hasn’t shown a viable strategy yet. I think she alluded briefly to polling in one story pointing to possible tactics – but – if you have something – it’s not a bad idea to use all the free publicity generated by your announcement to spread that message.

    He’s got the party and all the endorsements behind him – money wants to follow a winner – what’s your story of
    a: why he should go for the electorate?

    b: why the power structure should think you have a chance to win? What’s the path to victory?

    All I’ve heard so far is that she’s a good progressive who seems to have the same legislative agenda he has. There needs to be an affirmative argument for change.

  2. I think there’s another way of looking at Dana’s Senate run, Kat. Consider that a hearing was just held on MD’s trans rights bill. By timing the announcement of her run just before this hearing, Dana put MD legislators on notice that the state’s trans and allied community is tired of politics as usual and is going to start running candidates from our own community. The implied message there that the current crop of Democrats (including her opponent, openly gay Rich Madelano) aren’t up to the job of protecting all MD citizens from discrimination and it’s time for a change.

    For a while now, I’ve been calling on the community to start primarying those who are content with elitist politics as usual, including those who are supposed to be on our side, like Nancy Pelosi, who represents a district in the city with the largest population percentage of LGBT people in the entire country. I’m not sure Madelano qualifies on that score, but regardless I think it’s long overdue for trans people to have a presence in legislatures and other law-making bodies in this country. I’m glad Dana’s running and I hope she wins.

    By the way, Dana will be on my show this Thursday to talk about her Senate run. If you’d like to offer an opposing view Kat, you’d (still) be welcome to come to on the show and give your perspective.

    • SF has 17-18% LGBT pop? Nowhere else really compares to that.

      Montgomery County, MD is a very wealthy area – top ten in the country according to Forbes. Large LGBT pop by MD standards – but what does that mean? 5%?

      “The 2010 Census data released by the Williams Institute show these figures for same-sex couples living in D.C. area suburban jurisdictions:

      Montgomery County, Md. – 2,911 same-sex couples; 8.2 same-sex couples per 1,000 households”

      • Hopefully, how many LGBTs can vote for her isn’t relevant. Nobody can possibly win at that level without a much broader cross-section of the electorate than just the LGBT community behind them. What I think will be most interesting about Dana’s run (and I plan to address this with her on the show) is seeing if voters judge her on her qualifications and platform or on her gender identity. Call it a hunch, but I have a feeling that before this election is over we’ll have an answer to that question.

        • Then – why did you bring it up?

          Primaries against incumbents aren’t resume contests where voters dispationately review resumes and qualifications.

          The challenger needs to make an argument for change to win. And framing her candidacy totally through the lens of the nondiscrim bill is making her the trans candidate to most voters. And in a way that the general electorate will have a hard time finding resonance with – her opponent just sponsored that very bill, with public accommodations coverage. It’s one (likely smaller) issue to the general electorate among all of the issues voters care about. What are the others? Where do both candidates stand?

          So the questions are why you? Why now? What is the incumbent missing or failing at that the district needs that you hope to deliver? Why is change needed?

          And why should that change be you?

          And – why should we think your candidacy is viable? A question that always needs answering for institutional support & endorsements against incumbents. Like say – Unions, Emily’s List, Progrssive Groups, Community Groups etc.

          This is where the polling data would help. Because coming out of the box, she has a hard case to make against someone who handily won the seat.

          Unless the race is going to be an issues race & not run for the chance to win.

          Then she needs to place that issue front and center – and keep hammering it. But – losing has consequences if you really do want to win a seat.

          • I agree, Dana has to speak to the issues of her county as well as why she deserves election, not just trans rights. Given that it’s still less than a week since Dana announced, I’d expect those those positions to be coming soon. The trans rights bill is the just the most obvious issue she’d be connected to in some way.

            • “I think there’s another way of looking at Dana’s Senate run, Kat. Consider that a hearing was just held on MD’s trans rights bill. By timing the announcement of her run just before this hearing, Dana put MD legislators on notice that the state’s trans and allied community is tired of politics as usual and is going to start running candidates from our own community. The implied message there that the current crop of Democrats (including her opponent, openly gay Rich Madaleno) aren’t up to the job of protecting all MD citizens from discrimination and it’s time for a change.”

              Except one small problem this that….. neither Dana Beyer , NOR her “organization”, Gender Rights Maryland were involved in the least with identifying Rich Madaleno as the lead sponsor of the Fairness for All Marylanders Act. Nor are they members of the transgender lead 50+ organizational coalition which DID call the shots on the bill.

              In other words, NO legislator would look at her run against a sitting senator who is introducing a bill to protect her and other transMarylanders and this ” This is putting me on notice that its not business as usual.”

              I do not know how obtuse one has to be to think Dana Beyer is a power broker in the state when folks on the ground in Maryland KNOW otherwise.

              If you lived here, your thoughts might have sway, however you don’t so please stop pretending you have a clue about Maryland politics.

  3. […] It still isn’t trans people. […]

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a reply, but don't be a troll. Have a nice day!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s