WALKING IN YOUR OWN MISSTEPS
Matt of Malcontent is saying that he has asked AS to pull down the altered HRC logo, but AS has used it again.
THE DRAMA
So let's give them a chance to show what they can do with all those millions of gay people's money. -AS
*blink* I thought that AS's Priority One truth was that the HRC might not have "millions" of members.
THE TORTUOUS INTERNAL DENIAL
So when do the Democrats intend to move on that bill?
Is that a tacit recognition that conservatives and gay-conservatives have nothing to do with it all?
ANOTHER FACTUAL GAP IN THE WASTE-WORTH DIVIDE
A civil rights organization that has very, very few legislative or
organizational achievements at a critical time in the battle for gay equality should not, in my view, be splurging $26 million on a plush new building. It's waste like that that puts smiles on the faces of the religious right ...
I don't know how HRC got all their cash, but their financial statements tell me that they had a Capital Campaign. In other words, people who donated knew that they were giving money toward the building. Our local theater did the same.
It's astonishing that AS drops his conservative/libertarian principles to tell people how to spend their money. On reflection, though, it's not odd. I've debated with people in the past who intellectually deride Human Rights; but just as soon as the guys-with-uniforms start to break in the doors, they start shouting about violations and crimes against humanity ...
As for the Focus on the Family types, wouldn't they be more pleased if all the money went into a legislative lobbying effort that ended up in a Presidential veto? At least that way, their opponents would have no assets to show for the money spent while in "political exile" under the GOP, so to speak?
OF CLIQUE AND PARTY
But I fear their tactical objective in the next two years is to elect Senator Clinton ... -AS
Fear, of course, is the great mind destroyer. A reader writes:
Neither Sully nor Crain ever acknowledge that during the last 13 years, the GOP-controlled Congress was NEVER going to pass anything remotely gay-positive. EVER.
Hate-crimes legislation in the wake of Matthew Shepard? Killed by Trent Lott.
ENDA? Passed the House. Killed by Senate inaction. Passed the Senate. Killed in conference by DeLay.
So the big effort in Congress was to play defense and hope to change the playing field.
[see also comments by Nadler on his immigration reform bill, saying more or less the same thing.]
"WE" THE KNOWING, LEAD BY THE UNWILLING
We've already gotten more info out of them than they have offered in quite a while. Maybe we might even prod them to pass some pro-gay legislation.... -AS
Who is "we"? I got plenty of information just reading the annual reports, looking at the financial statements, and reading interviews and who offered support to whom.
Without what "we" refers to, it starts to look delusional; and the rest, a psychological life preserver.
link: Bootstrapping Andrew Sullivan
