Gov. Charlie Baker booed from stage at LGBT Executive Networking event

Governor Baker, LGBT rightsLast night transgender activists booed Gov. Charlie Baker off stage because of his lack of support for a pending bill designed to prevent bias against their community in public spaces. The bill in question, known as the public accommodations bill, would prohibit bias against transgender people in restaurants, shopping malls, and other public areas.

Baker was the keynote speaker at the 10th Annual Boston Spirit LGBT Executive Networking Night at the Marriott hotel in Copley Place. The annual event draws more than 1,000 LGBT business leaders and earlier in his speech he drew applause when he told the crowd that “we should not discriminate against anyone in Massachusetts.”, but according to The Boston Globe he infuriated many when he hedged on the question of the public accommodations bill. Rather than declare support, he said he would “make sure I talk to all parties involved” if the legislation comes to him. The crowd voiced their displeasure with boos.

You can read the full article in The Boston Globe here.

4 responses to “Gov. Charlie Baker booed from stage at LGBT Executive Networking event

  1. Governor Chuckles can not have it both ways.
    Stand up or sit down.
    The speech was disgusting – take a vocal position.
    By his silence he demonstrated he has zero interest in equality.
    I proudly booed – I was very sad to have to do so – but I’m not willing to be a doormat for a millionaire.

    Like

  2. Part of the negative reaction from the crowd was certainly due to his failure to take a position either of the two competing public accommodations bills. Another part of the reaction was the 15 minutes he spent essentially rambling on about important and unimportant accomplishments of his administration before disappointing everyone with a non-position statement. He seemed totally oblivious to his audience and totally unprepared for advocates standing a mere three feet away to have any kind of reaction. Non-commitment aside, it was an amateurish engagement with constituents that could have gone much differently if he seemed even remotely interested in engaging with the audience.

    Like

Leave a reply to Michael Cancel reply