Gay rights group advocates for commerce pick

Apart from being brilliant, as a Latino with a deep understanding of the region Richardson was an excellent choice for Commerce in the age of NAFTA.

I don't think 'gay' should be the determining criterion for Secretary of Commerce.

What on earth does sexual orientation have to do with being qualified to hold a cabinet post? It shouldn't come into the equation at all. If someone is otherwise qualified to be Secretary of Commerce, for example, then it shouldn't matter whether they are gay, straight, bi, celibate, etc. But what Equal Rep seems to be looking for here is a quota hire. That is something that will always rub a lot of people the wrong way. And Sousa ought to consider whether he's got a bit of tunnel vision. There are a great many minority groups besides gays who have never held cabinet positions.

Oh, Please! One would only hope that President-Elect Obama would ignore sexual orientation when reviewing pertinent criteria for any prospective cabinet member. If we are truly interested in being fair-minded, and if we strive to ignore a person's sexual orientation when firing them from a job, we also have an obligation to ignore a candidate's sexual orientation when hiring them for a job. Mr. Obama has already demonstrated a keen ability to select highly qualified, intelligent people to work with, let's hope he continues.

Why would a gay person want to be in the cabinet when he/she just got out of the closet?

The most qualified person should be chosen, whether he or she is black, gay, straight, white, pink, or has two heads.

Equal Rep wants Hochberg because he is a "gay" choice. That kind of thinking seems rather queer to me.

I am pretty Dam Sure "Gay" isn't a prerequisite for any Job, nor is Color of skin, Religion, Gender or for that matter, what car someone drives. Hopefully President Obama will be placing the most qualified individuals that have the experience and knowledge needed to put America back on track.

If I was putting a Company/Team together I would want the best talent available not the best GAY talent or the best Female Talent or the best Black talent just the best person for the job..

"They are the only minority group to have never been appointed in the history of the United States"

Are you sure about this statement? How much research have you done? Have we had Eskimo representation in a Cabinet? How about an Amish person? With a bit of internet research I could probably come up with a few more. How does one define a minority group? People named "Fred" could be a minority group, women who walk on water could be another. This is not an anti gay rant by any stretch of the matter more like and anit whine rant or an anti special interest group rant.

There very well may be a closet gay within his inner circle already and that should NOT be the deciding factor. We need truly qualified people without personal agendas....

To say gay americans have never been appointed isn't precisely correct. Donna Shalala? Janet Reno? 2 off the top of my head.

I'd be happy to see a gay cabinet member, but I care more about the quality of the appointments rather than tokenism.

That is precisely the point, apart from being brilliant, as a gay business man and past Federal government official with a deep understanding of business and of government, Fred Hochberg would be an excellent choice for Secretary of Commerce.

To paraphrase "Paul Q" - I don't think "gay" should be the determining criterion for NOT being picked for Secretary of Commerce.

Choosing someone based on anything other than qualifications is trully against everything Martin Luther King stood for. Simply read his speeches. MLK would also be ashamed the way the Democrats are determined to keep blacks as victims. MLK wanted NO MAN to be judged by his skin color. I'd infer that includes sexual preference. MLK believed in Republican values. Read the history of the Democrat Party....it wil amaze you.

Paul Q said 'I don't think 'gay' should be the determining criterion for Secretary of Commerce. '

Sexual orientation/identification should not be the determining criterion - positively or negatively - for any important Presidential appointment. As queer as I am, I don't want Obama choosing the 'next best candidate' to meet any group's demands for 'a seat at the table.'

RICHARDSON WAS AN EXCELLENT CHOICE FOR THE JOB SINCE HE HAS WOLRD EXPOSURE
CHOOSING A GAY PERSON YES BUT NOT SO MUCH EXPOSED TO TH WORLD ESPECIALLY THIS TIME WHEN THERE IS CRISIS IN THE FINANCIAL SYSTEMS OF THE WORLD
PAMFIL IN TANZANIA

Could someone explain to me how gay commerce differs from straight commerce ?

When one belongs to a minority, and every other minority has some representation, one feels aggrieved that a minority that makes up to10% of the population is not represented. Whilst I am not a fan of gay for gay's sake, it is important to the GLBT community to see that a change like that which is sweeping across the world as a result of Obama's election, includes us all.

I think that, from my limited knowledge of Sousa and Equal Rep (I am an Australian) the candidate is well qualified to be taken on in the role, and his sexuality is not the deciding factor, however, it would be great to see Barack with a queer member of his team.

I agree with the point that "gay" should not be the ticket into the cabinet. I question why everyone feels they have to have THEIR representation at the table, when ideally, the people at the table are supposedly there to represent everyone.
That being said, why is the Senate tiptoeing around the Illinois Governor's choice for filling Obama's seat? I've heard it reported repeatedly that if the pick were a white man, he simply would not be allowed to sit in the Senate. But because he is the only black man coming to the Senate, things are different.
Why is that? Hmmmm?

*sigh* Obviously, we are talking about people who ARE qualified, but whoalso happen to be gay - otherwise , why even bother. Being part of the "dominant culture", we could hardly expect heterosexual people to have any real understanding or comprehension of what it's like to be marginalized, discounted, snickered at, berated, and swept under the rug, all the time, all of your life. What we want is representation and recognition. This would exhibit TRUE leadership and change - making it abundantly clear to all that being gay no longer excludes someone for consideration even in the HIGHEST offices in our nation. It would be symbolic as well, I think there NEEDS to be a very prominent, and blatantly PUBLIC appointment, so that it's VERY very clear that gay people are welcome and acceptable and so that no one can dispute it or have any avenue whatsoever to continue to discriminate against us. This would be a distinct message, and hopefully maybe invoke some REAL tangible shifts in society. Every day there are still gay bashings, suicides and rapes, and kids are taunted and teased and even killed JUST because they're perceived as being (or are) gay. I'm sorry but it starts at the top.. Just as George Bush sent am "message" that it's okay to be an arrogant , corrupt person and ignore the law and public will to pursue one's personal objective. Now we need to have decent, tolerant and honest role models.