How can that be with someone like Dean in charge 
Well he and others are being deposed:
The suit charges that a campaign of infighting, discrimination and retaliation led to the illegal firing of Hitchcock after his partner, former Clinton appointee Paul Yandura, criticized the Party for what he claimed was a lack of support for LGBT causes, especially on the issue of defeating anti-gay ballot measures.
Hitchcock was fired less than a week after Yandura’s criticisms became public. According to Hitchcock, the Gay and Lesbian Leadership Council, of which he became the director in June of 2005, was created specifically to raise funds from LGBT supporters. The Party, he says, had no interest in being politically involved in LGBT issues otherwise.
The lawsuit charges that Hitchcock was paid less than his counterparts in comparable positions, while never receiving staff support or a budget. According to FEC records, his bi-weekly pay was $2,156, while the other directors were paid $2,508. The suit also says that Hitchcock, before his firing, was held personally responsible by Ms. Tagen for, and threatened over, Mr. Yandura’s statements about the Democratic Party. Dean, Tobias and Tagen, Hitchcock charges, began spreading rumors within the Party in an attempt to discredit him, he claimed.
I don’t see this going too far. The DNC will pay him off so as not to draw any negative press from this. Who knows, his homosexuality may have had nothing to do with it. In typical liberal fashion, expect a payoff rather than a fight!
H/T to memeorandum
Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Right Pundits, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Rosemary’s Thoughts, 123beta, Adam’s Blog, Right Truth, Shadowscope, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Big Dog’s Weblog, Cao’s Blog, Nuke’s, third world county, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, DragonLady’s World, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, Celebrity Smack, The Pink Flamingo, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, Stageleft, and Church and State, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
“I don’t see this going too far. The DNC will pay him off so as not to draw any negative press from this. Who knows, his homosexuality may have had nothing to do with it.”
—————————
I agree, this won’t go far and won’t make more than a ripple of a wave. Sounds like a pay dispute gone ugly.
As for his homosexuality having any factor, I seriously doubt it. In the Democratic Party power structure, that would be highly unlikely.
“Sounds like a pay dispute gone ugly.”- So why base the suit on homosexual discrimination? Why not fight it if in fact homosexuality had nothing to do with the firing?
“So why base the suit on homosexual discrimination?”
————
Because it’s a good hand to play.
Hard to beat.
Hey SFL, research this case a little further. I’ve read a bit about it, and it is most assuredly a case of the people with the power to retaliate against this guy for his partner’s comments did so. Personally I don’t see why the LBGT community would allow a group with the horrible history that the DNC has to exploit them. But then again, blacks allow the DNC to exploit them despite the party’s history of oppressing blacks from the founding of the party. The founders of the Democratic party were slave owners.