News Tips?
-- tips@phblend.com

PHB Mobile

Your blogmistress is in need of a real vacation...

I've made it to the initial round for favorite progressive blogger in the Air America Cruise Contest. I have to stay in the Top 5 before the second voting round begins, so your vote is appreciated! First voting round:
Nov. 16th - Dec. 3rd, 2009



Join Stop Taser Torture on 12.4.09


33|175:175

About
-- The Blog
-- Pam | My home page
-- Autumn
-- Daimeon
-- Julien
-- "Radical" Russ
-- Terrance

Contact the Baristas

The Blend Blogrolls

Activism


Best of the Blend
Blog Posts

Special Events and Interviews

Blend-o-licious endorsements...



The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend:
"a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."

He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior." (CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)


Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).

"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008



Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:

A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist."
(Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)

"A nutty lesbian blogger."
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)


Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush


who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
--"Joe"

Content © 2004-2008
Pam Spaulding

House Blend logo © 2005
Melissa McEwan

Photo of Pam Spaulding
© Judy G. Rolfe
All Rights Reserved.


SITE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Support the Blend




An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.


Sigh. Look at the wrangling over fed hate crimes bill strategy

by: Pam Spaulding

Sat May 23, 2009 at 08:00:00 AM EDT


I don't even know why there's hand-wringing over this. There's a divide on whether it's tactically sound to send hate crimes legislation through the Senate as a stand-alone bill for a vote versus dumping it in with a defense authorization bill. The jellyfish in the Senate are floating the latter again. (Wash Blade):
Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the longest-serving openly gay member of Congress, said in an interview Friday with the Blade that supporters of hate crimes legislation in the Senate are considering attaching the measure as an amendment to the 2010 defense authorization bill, but House lawmakers are trying to convince the Senate to pass the legislation as a standalone measure.

The bill passed the House on April 29, 249-175, as a standalone bill. The legislation would allow the U.S. Justice Department to assist in the prosecution of hate crimes committed against LGBT people that result in death or serious injury.

In 2007, it was tacked onto the defense bill and because anti-war folks and conservatives opposed the bill for their own reasons, the leadership in Congress stripped the hate crimes provision out. With the different composition of the Senate this time around, the thinking is tactically it could work this time around.
Frank said the Senate is considering passing hate crimes legislation in the same way this year because "they think they'll have a hard time passing it because of Senate rules." While it takes 60 votes in the Senate to end debate on legislation, amending a bill sometimes takes only a majority vote.

But while Frank said "there's been some talk" about putting a hate crimes provision in the defense bill, House lawmakers are "trying to talk them out of it."

Honestly, IMHO, let the House and Senate vote on this outright, let's see who opposes this bill straight out. In particular, I want to see the roll call of Dems who vote against it. The polls are with us, purportedly the votes are there -- it's time for some legislative responsibility and ownership on civil rights matters.

So, 1) do you think a standalone bill weakens its chance of passage, and 2) which strategy will be used in the Senate?  

Pam Spaulding :: Sigh. Look at the wrangling over fed hate crimes bill strategy
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Spineless Democrats (Again)
Yes, this should be a standalone bill. That removes the (inevitable) GOP claims that the Democrats were afraid to vote on this (which, of course, they are). And it forces the Democrats to show us who truly is an ally and who is afraid to stand with us.

C'mon, Democrats -- can't you assemble enough vertebrae among yourselves to form at least one spine?


Until Harry Reid figures out what a "filibuster" is
The Senate Democrats will remain useless.  

The House Democrats called the Republicans' bluff with the speedreading of the energy bill.  It's time for Senate Democrats to call the Senate Republicans' bluff.  Let the Democrats start coming to the Senate chamber with phonebooks and when someone declares they will filibuster, let them offer phonebooks for the Republicans to start reading.  It's time for some political theater from the inept Democratic leadership.

# Duty, duty -- honor is, is --
Honor, Creideiki -- alertly
# Shared, is -- Honor #


Indeed. The GOP keeps threatening to use the weapon
let us see whether they are tough enough to pull the trigger - and see what the reaction will be from their constituents. Nothing looks as obstructionist as reading names out of a phone book for hours.

It would also be interesting to see how long these guys can stand.





Claim to fame: Posted first PHB diary to be demoted


[ Parent ]
Standalone
or, if they must attach it to another bill, make it something related, like a crime prevention bill.

I'm really sick of these unrelated amendments (like the gun amendment to the credit card bill). It's like ordering a pizza and finding out you have to take a left front fender from a 1969 Camaro with it.




Claim to fame: Posted first PHB diary to be demoted


If they have to attach something pro-LBGT to a defense bill,
wouldn't it make sense for it to be the repeal of DADT?  Oh, wait--Congress has to wait for Obama to take the lead in waiting for Congress.  Never mind.

I am not interested in picking up crumbs of compassion thrown from the table of someone who considers himself my master. I want the full menu of rights.  -Archbishop Desmond Tutu


[ Parent ]
Stand alone bill
Then let it go up or down on that.  It will also be interesting to see how hard Dems work to pass this one.

Let me guess...
They'll attach it as an amendment to the DC Defence of Marriage Act. Or something equally asinine.

I forget who the commenter was who predicted this. I'm right-wing, but even I didn't think the Dems were quite that bad.

I guess all that Religious Right propaganda about it being the "Pedophile Protection Bill" is causing some panic in the Senate.

Maybe if they stripped out all that Gender Identity stuff, and just made it explicitly GLBs they may have the votes. We have a precedent for this, after all.

I've stopped having any expectations of the current Congress. R or D, their snouts are in the trough, the economy's circling the drain, and the vast majority tell themselves that porkbarrelling and doing favours for friends is what it's all about.

There is no situation so complex it can't get even worse


There are two reasons not to strip out gender identity
First, it's just wrong.  Transgender people don't need more time in the shade of the LGB bus.  I'm tired of people being unfair to people that aren't like them just to get the rightwing to throw crumbs at starving people.

Second, if you leave gender identity out, there's no protection for anything at all.  The defense goes from, "I attacked him because he was gay," to, "I attacked him because he was holding hands with a man, and only a woman should do that."  

Some people really need to understand that transgender issues are tied inextricably with choice of sleeping partners.

# Duty, duty -- honor is, is --
Honor, Creideiki -- alertly
# Shared, is -- Honor #


[ Parent ]
Well said. It's discouraging that this even has to be said.


[ Parent ]
We're used to the thinking...
... and that should tell you how few transfolks really have expectations in the senate.

I think a standalone bill would pass.  Then again, I just visited 94 of the Senate offices over the last month, in person, to drum up support, and all but 8 actually gave an attempt at listening to me.

However, I think the Dem leadership thinks that they do not have the kind of strong coalition within the party to get this through.

Because they are scared.

Anyone who has merely written something being upset should call their senator, should have their friends and family call their senator, and should generally make it known that such a bill is important.

Even if you don't think they will support it.

Let's have that roll call vote.

http://www.dyssonance.com  Breaking all the rules...


[ Parent ]
I think it should stand alone too.
There is no logical reason to oppose this bill or to be afraid of voting for it.  The "freedom of religion" argument is totally bogus.  There are no religions that force people into committing hate crimes.  Of course, that doesn't stop people from trying to hide behind religion as an alibi for hate.  

The politicians need to grow a set and stop coddling these hypocrites.  


Ths spineless Dems- so much for change
Let the hate crimes bill stand alone. Let's hear the floor debate. And don't put LGBT legislation in the closet of an appropriations bill.  

Standalone
We need to know who is with us and who is not.  If they can't get hate crimes through you can forget ENDA and a repeal of DADT.

Exactly! The only thing to wait for is Senator Franken...
But if a US Senate with 59 Democrats and 2 Independents amd 39 Republicans can't pass a bill to prevent hate crimes, then we. are. f***ed.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Mad Professah Lectures http://madprofessah.com
"In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act." George Orwell


[ Parent ]
Does anyone remeber far enough back
say to just post election, when Representative Frank and others were assuring us that the Hate Crimes Bill would pass, and pass quickly? Along with an ENDA?

Then they said DADT would come first

and now...?

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid


Agreed: I'd lke to see it standalone
That way we can applaud the allies who stand up on this -- and shine the spotlight on those who won't.

jon

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Report TOS Violations



Join the Blend Chat Room



Premium Sponsors



BlogAds






Search the Blend
Current site


PHB 2.0 Web
Search Blend 1.0 Archives
Ad Networks


BlogSheroes BlogAds


Miscellany

RSS Feeds

Subscribe with Bloglines

Visit NCBlogs


frontpage hit counter

Stats

Powered by: SoapBlox