Emanuel (volunteer coordinator for Boxer) & Senator Boxer,

I'm a practical Democrat. I'm a realistic Democrat. I want Senator Boxer and the Democrats to win handily this November. This is why I dedicated much of my free time over the last year to coming down to your offices and stuffing envelopes, making calls, faxing materials, fixing databases, helping with functions, promoting fundraisers, and offering any other help I could. That is why I wear my Boxer button on my backpack everywhere I go, everyday.

With that said, I am disappointed today. I really thought that Senator Boxer was smarter than to fall for anti-Gay rhetoric. I know that Senator Boxer is pro-Gay in general. I still commend her for standing up against the wholly anti-Gay Defense of Marriage Act in 1996-- especially when it was such a difficult thing to do in Washington at that time. I still highlight her stellar progressive record in the U.S. Senate on civil rights, women's rights, GLBT rights, and human rights to my friends and colleagues. So that is why I am rather saddened to see her using such anti-Gay rhetoric in today's newspaper by announcing via her staff that "she also agrees with the law's definition that marriage is between a man and a woman." Again, I understand her need to be practical and to win over the majority of Californians in November. But, why even enter the debate with this rhetoric? Why not state her long record for civil and GLBT rights, her strong commitment to working with the Gay community, and use language that isn't being propogated by the right? Why not utilize pro-Gay language and not fall into the trap by the right-wing regarding whether marriage is between 'a man and a woman'? There are other, more harmonious and pro-Gay ways to address this and be supportive of our Gay community and be practical in winning the statewide November race. And she will soon find herself on the wrong side of history.

Ever since our local clubs (Alice B. Toklas & Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Clubs) held a joint fundraiser in the LGBT Community Center here in San Francisco last August I have been putting great pressure on them to hold another, much more high-profile one this year, during the election season, when more and more people would be interested in supporting her and fighting the Republicans. Today, with her using this rhetoric of the right, and falling into this trap, I'm not sure there would even be the interest in holding such a fundraiser. That's a practical detriment to her cause, and ours.

Again, I am a practical and realistic Democrat. And I have prepared myself, and told others to prepare, for our friends in politics to say some pretty bad things about our GLBT community, specifically related to the marriage issue, over the course of the 2004 election season. And I know that I certainly do not want the right-wing to be able to utilize my life as a wedge issue for them to get Bush a second term. And I know that they will do that in a minute. Somehow I believed that Senator Boxer would be able to be above the wedge issue and has worked closely beside us for long enough to couch any concerns in pro-Gay language, and not to fall into this right-wing trap.

There is no question that I will be voting for Senator Boxer this year. We need her in the U.S. Senate for a whole host of important reasons, including fighting against Bush in his right-wing endeavors, and fighting for the rights of Gay Americans. That said, I need to take some time off right now from the volunteering endeavors, I'm not sure how to talk to my friends and colleagues about her right now, and I've taken my button off my bag.

Yours,
Reese Aaron Isbell