Mixner: DC-based LGBT civil rights groups - the 'Oh Lord, Not Now' movement

After being wrong so often lately...

... about right-wing extremist American traitor Ted Olson and marching in Washington, specifically, it's nice that Mixner is finally using his powers for good.

Fighting for civil rights in the one way that will actually work -- repealing Prop 8 next year -- is, naturally, the one thing that all the experts are against.  All the experts who are responsible for Prop 8 passing in the first place, of course.

What the hell happened to our movement?

---

by: diablorobotico @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 10:03:24 AM CDT

What happened?

We turned it over to politicians.  Every gay org was started by activists.  Tough minded take no prisoners activists.  As those people left, politicians were hired in their place. Go along to get along back room dealing personal agenda politicians. GLAAD has recently replaced a politician with yet another politician.
It's one of the reason I am enjoying watching activists(of whatever stripe)taking detours around these guys.

---

by: DavidinPS @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 10:20:59 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Weird terminology

Whatever the merits of the "wait and see" argument (and I certainly agree with Mixner about it), I simply don't understand how people who want to wait and do nothing until some rosy time in the future qualify as activists.  However defensible you might think it is, standing in the corner, waiting and doing nothing is not activism.  It is, at very best, passivism.  And that never got anybody anywhere.

Cynic, n.  A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be.  
-Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary

---

by: QScribe @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 10:03:51 AM CDT

Prof activists need income

I am loathe to be too cynical toward our community leaders - many of them are devoted, idealistic, and not corrupt.  But it does stand to reason that nobody wants to work themselves out of a job.  

It's not like there will be a single moment when all social justice for LGBTs will suddenly be achieved, but there has been an industry built around equality.  People are being hired!  Careers are on the line!!

If we succeed too soon...people will lose jobs!!

aka - let's wait until 2012...keep a gay employed, delay repeal...and pick a year that is liable to be disastrous and very competitive for attention and money.  

Worst case, scenario:  Consensus switches from 2010 to 2012...nothing happens next year and the apples are all dumped into the basket of 2012 without even ONE discussion about what makes 2012 an awful choice (maybe even worse than a "rushed" effort in 2010)...then the repeal fails in 2012 by a hair...even less than it did in 2008...making another effort possible in 2014.  

And the "leaders" get to be paid for two more years.  

---

by: Patrick @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 10:23:47 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Whether that's too cynical or not (and I don't think it is),

it seems unavoidable to me that our LGBT institutions--and I mean virtually all of them, but certainly the big, long-standing ones--have been housebroken by the political establishment (by which I mean the Democratic Party; the GOP is off the table entirely, of course).  They simply won't push too hard for, or make too much of a public issue of, anything that makes the Democratic leadership uncomfortable.  

And they can spout every conceivable alibi for their inaction.  But it's still inaction.  Joe Solmonese can go the the White House for cocktails and canapes, he can stand grinning like a trained marmoset behind the president--hell, he can get down on his knees and lick Obama's boots clean--but what does any of it have to do with activism?  Yes, it keeps the inside-the-beltway crowd employed, but the essence of their jobs is to do nothing meaningful.

Cynic, n.  A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be.  
-Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary

---

by: QScribe @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 10:40:17 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

We will not win with an in the Beltway strategy

We will win, if we have the real desire and the spine, with community based in your face radical activism.

We will only get our rights when we make it too inconvienient or too costly to deny them to us any longer.

It is that simple.
And that daunting, apparently

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

---

by: MauraHennessey @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:27:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The Prepare to Prevail position is about ACTION

Getting a ballot measure campaign that we can win in California ready in 2012 requires action now.

Just because we are not on the ballot now does not mean that "nothing will happen next year."

There are 300,000 minds that needs to be changed in California. How long do you think that is going to take?

I was out knocking on doors last weekend talking to voters about marriage equality. There are 66 weekends left before election day 2010.

What ARE YOU doing next weekend to win marriage equality?


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

---

by: Mad Professah @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 11:59:06 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I get it...I do...

See, this is why I hesitate with my cynicism.  People like YOU (Mad Prof) out there taking action...that's real work and real risk and real committment.  Hopefully it has an effect.  

I long for an organization that isn't focused solely on door knocking campaigns.  There may very well be value in those campaigns.  I don't trust them.  I don't believe in them.  I really don't think that people will change their minds about me just because I had the balls to knock on their door.  

I won't discourage the work you (and those groups) do, but I'm just not gonna do that.  

I'm much more interested in direct action and participating in systemic revolt.  It may also not have a reliable impact on changing hearts and minds...or it might show that we are seriously committed and not content to wait for a more appropriate day (that will never come).  That sentiment reflects my state of mind and it seems to be what has finally started the ball rolling in this latest push for justice.

Marriage rights have been on the battlefield (this time around) for less than, but close to 10 years.  DADT is a teenager.  ENDA is nearly middle aged.  

People are getting pissed now - especially after Prop 8 showed how close we are to having what little we have taken away in a whim.  

The streets were filled...and will be again...and that has encouraged us to encourage each other to take action...and that - to ME - has more impact on momentum than excercing caution and knocking on doors and hoping that people that truly despise us will reconsider their animosity.  

The Binder-Simon poll showed that 30% of respondents that knew or were related to an LGBT person still were still opposed to allowing us to marry.  If THOSE people can't be persuaded by hearts and minds, then I have no idea how anyone will be.

Drawing a line in the sand and defending it is how I would like to show that I am not going to stop demanding what is rightfully mine.

---

by: Patrick @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:23:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Cognitive dissonance overload

So dear ol' David Mixner, a Bill Clinton advisor - (whatever came of LGBT rights or lack thereof from that admin?), writes from his grounds/office/mansion in upstate New York about how those well-meaning activists are doing it all wrong.

Thanks but no thanks, Mix.  No more double speak.

The huzzahs for a pro-marriage equaltiy op-ed on in the WSJ are just that.  Huzzahs for a pro-marriage equality op-ed in the WSJ - not huzzahs for an ill-timed and incomplete lawsuit that requires the intervention of EXPERIENCED marriage equality litigators to shore it up before potential ruling.

As for "not getting ahead of ourselves" ...say what?

Have you forgotten how to count votes?  Oh, that's right, Clinton taught you how to count votes for DADT.  And such a lovely vote count it was on DOMA too.  How overwhelming was the Senate DOMA vote again?

When there's a majority ready to vote for a given bill in each chamber -- and a president ready to sign -- that's when you can talk about movement leaders crying "Oh Lord, Not Now"

Wait a minute. That's exactly what happened with the hate crimes bill this year.  Shazaam!  Counting votes on positive legislation works. Don't worry.  I don't expect a pontificating former Clinton admin official to remember that.

Or remember Hawaii and the wave of DOMAs after that.  Or Mass and the wave of amendments after that.

Yes.  I'll just keep working to change people's minds one at a time.  I'll huzzah when the Wall Street Journal prints a pro-marriage equality op-ed.  And I'll try to do better at ignoring strategically poor armchair quarterbacking from the admin the brought us DOMA and DADT.

 

---

by: HunterC @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 10:13:45 AM CDT

Um, I don't know Mr. Mixner...

... but didn't' he have a very public falling out with Clinton over exactly the issues you are tarring him with? Didn't he quit the administration because of this stuff?

Or am I remembering incorrectly?

---

by: DavidinPS @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 10:24:44 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Walking the same path

Mixner is often presented as someone who "knows his way around the Beltway" or likes to call upon his extensive political experience or "near 50 years of organizing."

Someone with such credentials knows full well what passing a bill requires.  

For someone like Mixner to question the motives of our organizations' leadership is simply too much for me.  His motives in working for Clinton were often questioned, and we know how that ended.

Further the idea posited here and elsewhere that LGBT leaders want to wait on attain some or all rights to keep themselves in a job is absolutley crazy.  

For those very few that wouldn't gladly work themselves out of a job in seeking equality and justice, they know plenty places at other advocacy groups or firms where they can land.

This "keeping rights away so that organizations can get money" is among the most insidious of the many divisive arguments that has (re)taken hold in LGBT advocacy lately.  If you truly believe that is someone's motivation, look inward as well.

---

by: HunterC @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 10:43:44 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

But...

...you didn't answer my question.  Didn't Mixner very publicly denounce Clinton for this stuff? Didn't he quit over it?

---

by: DavidinPS @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 15:11:57 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

That's my point

Who enabled what?

Mixner enabled Clinton (when others were questioning his motives) to sell out the LGBT community.

Now Mixner and the like come around saying that some DC Beltway cabal has sold out the LGBT community -- with Mixner questioning their motives.

The difference?  Mixner didn't foresee Clinton signing DADT and DOMA.  Obama will sign hate crimes.  

So whose experience, rhetoric, and political foresight do I trust?

But this discussion is bigger than Mixner.  

Securing success means getting a majority to back you -- whether in a legislative body, a court, or a popular referendum.  Majorities are imperative to securing a victory.  

Why some portions of the LGBT advocacy community seem to ignore this necessity remains beyond me.  I understand impatience and even the need to use advocacy as an educational tool, but constantly firing away at our already overwhelmed advocates is at best only questionably useful.

In my state's seven-member Supreme Court, you'd lose a marriage equality case badly.  On a good day you'd lose 2-5, more likely 1-6.  So yeah, I'll tell anyone foolish enough to think about a suit to take their ideals and go home.

That's not being passive or defeatist.  It's about knowing where to use scare resources wisely.  And education can continue in other ways without establishing bad precedent -- or making a situation worse or more difficult to fix.  (That's the reference to DADT and DOMA.)

---

by: HunterC @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 16:18:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

David Mixner may be the wrong guy to be criticizing others for being too entrenched in the parties of our political enemies.

He was a Clinton advisor. All his insider connections, his advice and his purported being a 'Friend of Bill" were worthless when it came to stopping Clinton from signing DADT, championing DOMA and boasting about it to get the cracker vote. Although he's right about the timidity of these groups. Timidity, or in this case cowardice and gross negligence certainly played a role as No on 8, HRC and EQCA sat around with their thumbs firmly embedded in their nether regions as the right wing Yes on 8 picked up on Obama's anti-GLBT war cry "gawd's in the mix". In the last few days before November 4th we watched freeze as our polling numbers suddenly inverted.

They sat around like a bunch of deer in the headlights of the Obamabus, unable to react. They didn't criticize Obama (and McCain) for their uncalled for bigotry but instead criticized the right for accurately quoting Obamas bigoted message. They didn't organize a leafleting blitz in minority communities, on campuses or at plant gates. Instead they told people to report to Obama HQ for last minute assignments. They didn't win, they lost. Rather, we lost.

The reason for their timidity is that those groups and others are not so much part of the GLBT communities as they're front groups for the Democrats in our communities. Their first allegiance is not to us but to the Democrats. That's why they don't regular organize mass demonstrations for the original ENDA, for repeal of Clintons DADT and DOMA and for tough hate crimes laws. That's why they didn't organize a mass demonstration at the Inaugural to drown out Warren. That's why they don't have daily picket lines around the White House and Congress.

It would upset their masters. Things would get out of hand. They'd have to cancel lobbying lunches and staff retreats, and really, we all know that the best strategizing happens after the third Long Island Iced Tea sitting around a resort pool. They might actually be asked to pick up a picket sign, get their coifs mussed. They might find themselves in the awkward position of having to talk to real GLBT folks instead of political hustlers. Some of the folks on the picket line might even suggest that they take a cut in pay until they actually produce something.  

Quelle horreur!

The looter rich much prefer working with Democrats like Obama and the Clintons - they're greedier, they fool more people and they're able to get away with a lot more than Republicans.  

---

by: donal1944 @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 10:48:42 AM CDT

Exactly right

This is exactly what I've been telling my friends and family about why I'm mad at the Administration, Congress, and the LGBT "leaders".
When I started my protest campaign I contacted every major LGBT organization asking for ideas and support. Not one contacted me back. I don't have a name in any circles, so I can be ignored, and so can the entire LGBT community that doesn't kowtow to their line.
The HRC building is a 10 minute walk to the White House. So it's not like it would be inconvenient to just talk to the protesters.

But the greater community needs to step up. We need protests and demonstrations, but we need people to be there for them to be effective.
How many LGBT people are there in DC and the surrounding areas? How many of you are reading this right now? You have direct access to the White House and Congress. If ACTUP can organize a sit-in in the Rotunda what are you waiting for?

And for that matter, why aren't the main page bloggers calling for protest action that will actually get attention. So many people in the comments have been pushing forward that idea, but it does take a figure head to gather people together. I've tried, but I'm a no one. You try to give power to the people and the throw it right back to you.

(Most of my posts seem to end up as rants, and I don't mean to sound so harsh, I'm just so tired of waiting for someone to step up. There's only so much one person yelling into the wind can do.)

Time to Stand! ProtestForHumanRighs.com

---

by: Enigmas @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 15:13:06 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

D.C. Michael Rogers doesn't like my tax protest

It's too revolutionary, not paying taxes.  Instead of tax protest, he suggested that we add two cents to our 1040 tax forms, as a statement giving our two cents worth.  Sort of like the pussy action, "Gay for a day".  So much for perspective.  Some want to play it safe.  D.C. is career oriented to get job advancements and favorable treatment by the "higher ups".  Kissing ass with Barney means profit to your organization.

Same-Sex Marriage is good for the economy.

---

by: CharlesMerrill @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 19:48:57 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Pussy Action? Where?

---

by: Pollyanna @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 19:58:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Everywhere

Pay taxes if you want to a government that erases you as a second class citizen but you are digging your own grave if you do not protest.

Same-Sex Marriage is good for the economy.

---

by: CharlesMerrill @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 20:09:03 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Gosh, Charles, talk about not taking my bait :)

---

by: Pollyanna @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 20:10:34 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Pollyanna :)

Hugs.  I get revved up, 0 to queen in 2 seconds.  

Same-Sex Marriage is good for the economy.

---

by: CharlesMerrill @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 20:14:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

comparing previous struggles of freedom

All demanded equality laid out by the constitution, and the authors of the constitution wanted freedom from a Monarchy that taxed the colonies without representation.  Women's sufferage movment bombed government office buildings in Britian, and marched in Washington demanding the right to vote.  Religion was the galvanizing force behind the Civil Rights movement of the 1950's.  We LGBT'S are an unique tribe and we can't seem to galvanize behind a philosophy.  Will a march on Washington do anything to make changes or getting arrested in front of the White House ?  Probably not.  Unemployment up to double digits and climbing.  The economic situation getting worse in the next quarter will be stealing our thunder no matter what we do.
Looking forward to his next essays.

Same-Sex Marriage is good for the economy.

---

by: CharlesMerrill @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 11:05:57 AM CDT

Whatever the merits of the criticism

...the Boies/Olsen lawsuit is not a good example.

No one has yet explained where, exactly, we're supposed to get the required five votes for same-sex marriage on the U.S. Supreme Court. We absolutely, positively do not have Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito (none of whom seem likely to leave the Court anytime soon). That's four, meaning we absolutely, positively have to get every single other vote. That means, best-case scenario, there is ZERO margin for error. Justices like moderately conservative Anthony Kennedy and moderately liberal Stephen Breyer will have to be willing to use the Constitution to force same-sex marriage on the 45 states that don't have it, or else we'll suffer an enormous defeat. There are calculated risks worth taking, and then there are irresponsible risks to be avoided. The Boies/Olsen suit is the second kind.

The kind of stubborn or naive refusal to look realistically at the court is exactly what happened in New York. Anyone who had studied the New York high court could have told the litigants in the marriage challenge that it was highly unlikely that the Republican-majority New York court would rule in favor of marriage equality. But the litigants went off half-cocked anyway and suffered a major defeat that could easily have been avoided with a little more realism and a little less naivete.

---

by: uh_huhh @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 11:27:09 AM CDT

actually, no

The USSC can just strike DOWN a marriage ban without forcing states to treat same-sex couples in all 50 states...

Plus the court that hears the Boies-Olson lawsuit will probably have Sotomayor and at least one more Justice.


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

---

by: Mad Professah @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:01:25 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I agree that hestitancy about Boies-Olson lawsuit does not equal lack of activism

First, if the Boies-Olson lawsuit is successful, the states will have no law to hide behind if they want to treat same-sex couples unequally.  So, as a practical matter, a decision against DOMA is a decision in favor of same-sex marriage in all 50 states.

I agree the Boies-Olson lawsuit is a bad example of movement leaders being "passive."  The reality is that it is far from assured that there are 5 votes on the Supreme Court for a decision in favor of marriage.  

Also, some of the organizations that are hesitant about the Boies-Olson lawsuit are the same organizations that have taken incredible risks in the courts that, I dare say, are quite "activist" in nature.

Examples:
Iowa marriage lawsuit--Lambda Legal
California marriage lawsuit--NCLR
Hawaii marriage lawsuit--Freedom to Marry (and that one didn't turn out too good, did it?...it led to DOMA & a constitutional amendment in Hawaii).
Massachusetts, "Goodridge," lawsuit: GLAD
Vermont civil unions lawsuit: GLAD
Connecticut marriage lawsuit:  GLAD
New Jersey marriage lawsuit:  Lambda Legal
[And many other non-marriage suits involving adoption rights, free speech, and employment discrimination.]

Also, the Boies-Olson lawsuit is going forward, so it doesn't matter whether or not the groups were initially on board.  

I would argue that we see far more passivity in our "political" D.C. organizations than we do in our legal groups.  Unlike lawsuits that go forward whether a group objects or not, it actually does matter whether political LGBT organizations do something because action won't happen without their backing.  Like most who probably read the blend, I believe that each of us holds the power to become an "activist" regardless of what the DC groups are doing. Ways to do this include lobbying our congresspeople to pass a trans-inclusive ENDA during the August congressional recess and protesting at appropriate events.

---

by: Repeal8 @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 13:20:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well said

I couldn't agree more.

If Lambda, GLAD, NCLR, and ACLU all say Boies/Olsen is a bad idea, their opinions shouldn't be lightly dismissed as excessively "passive." They have not been shy about taking risks in litigation, even some that were unwise.

People are also forgetting that we've been down this road before, only at the state level. Several years ago a gay couple on a crusade with a reckless attorney filed a lawsuit challenging Arizona's same-sex marriage ban. Lambda, ACLU, et al. said it was a bad idea and urged them to withdraw the suit. The stubborn and naive couple and reckless attorney pressed ahead. And guess what? Unanimous court decisions rejecting the challenges in Arizona, as Lambda et al. had predicted.

One doesn't do the rest of any good by pressing forward with a reckless legal challenge that our expert legal groups conclude is too risky.

---

by: uh_huhh @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 14:33:00 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Don't blame Hawaii or DOMA on Freedom to Marry

They won their court case, Baehr vs. Lewin. It was the goddam mormons who funded the anti-marriage amendment and told every lie in the book (and made up a few new ones) to convince locals that gays are icky white people who want to steal your children. Fifteen years later and the state legislature STILL can't get off the collective duff and abide by the decision to provide all the rights and protections of marriage to same-sex couples.

God save ornery old queens! - kevinchi

---

by: Keori @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 14:34:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Change in court membership won't matter

Sotomayor replaces Souter, that just trades a liberal for a liberal. And I wouldn't be so certain that Sotomayor would rule for same-sex marriage. Her lower court decisions aren't extremely liberal.

The other likely departures (Stevens and Ginsburg) are also liberal votes, so it would, again, just be replacing liberals with liberals. That does nothing to move the Court to the left.

And the Boies/Olsen suit is not tailoring its legal theory to California's Prop. 8. To rule for the plaintiffs in tht case, the Court would virtually no choice but to rule in a way that, as in Roe v. Wade, had the effect of striking down every ban in the country in one fell swoop. I suspect that even some of the liberals aren't prepared to do that.

---

by: uh_huhh @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 14:26:30 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

That's not true

And the Boies/Olsen suit is not tailoring its legal theory to California's Prop. 8.

They're very much tailoring it specifically to the unique conditions that exist in California. We have 18,000 same-sex couples who were married before the ban, and are still married. We have uncounted couples who cannot now marry because of the ban. Similarly situated couples are treated in completely different ways. That situation doesn't exist anywhere but here.

Cause any fool knows, a dog needs a home; a shelter from pigs on the wing

---

by: QueerInSoCal @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 18:50:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Activists don't wait for the right moment.

I am not a checkbook.  

---

by: Karen in Kalifornia @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 11:49:16 AM CDT

There is something to say for Go Big or Go Home

Democrats are as powerful as they may be for 20 years, with the White House and a 60 vote Senate, and super Majority in Congress. Republicans are as weak as they might ever be in the same time frame, and in particular the rabid fundie haters are blamed for loses. We have the added incentive that youth voters don't even understand why someone would consider their gay/lesbian/bi/trans friends less than fully equal.

If not now.....WHEN?

Liberation movements don't move in a single predictable line, sometimes you stumble into a compelling tactic, sometimes your enemies make serious mistakes to exploit.
I doubt someone sat down and planned and predicted Rosa Parks refusing to give up her bus seat was a smart tactic, or getting all Black poor people to walk or carpool to work for a year.
I doubt Suffrage women imagined being arrested and hunger strikes would be their winning strategy.
Willing to be bold, and willing to sacrifice seems the necessary strategy.

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:11:37 PM CDT

Minimalist Incrementalism

The Democrats now, apparently, feel that they have to make some progress on civil rights.  They're going to give us hate crimes, and if that looks like it's not enough, repeal DADT.  The next question will be if they're willing to repeal DOMA or not, but they won't even consider it unless they're tabulating the score card and seeing that the increments they've made are too minimal to get the GLBT community back into the Democratic coalition.

The reality, though, is that not the whole GLBT community is aware enough to walk away from the Democrats (or not willing, at any rate).  So they need to provide the minimal amount to keep just enough GLBTers in for the next election.  This is now our coalition building time--if we wait even until the primary season for 2010 (which will start any day now if it hasn't already depending on where one is)--then nothing will happen and we'll be looking at the scoreboard and see 1460 days and 0% or 15% equality achieved.

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

---

by: MileHighDawg @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 13:17:50 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

So...

The cabal of powerful decision makers wants everything to be safe, clean and perfect before moving. Don't upset anyone, don't jump ahead of ourselves and most of all don't deviate from a well-laid plan that hopefully will eventually lead to victory.

So what is Mixner's position on trans-inclusion in ENDA?  And what was it in 2007?

I'm asking because I genuinely do not know (though, given his Clintonian pedigree, I have my suspicions.)

>^..^<

---

by: KatRose @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:17:18 PM CDT

Mixner's History is Inconsistent

I'm glad Mixner is speaking out about this, but I have to laugh that the chief Aplogist for Bill Clinton, who would defend Clinton and DOMA and DADT to this day, who was the consummate cautious ally for the Clintons while the rest of us suffered, has finally seen the light is a bit of poetic justice.  

He's right about HRC (the unnamed co-conspirator here).  HRC has always been stupidly cautious, because its always been, post Tim McFeeley, a poorly administered, board driven collection of egos and money.  Most of the HRC board are well off, do not "get" the anger of the community because of the priviliged lives they have led, and totally buy into the system because they were raised within it and profited from it.  I am not some vegan anarchist, I'm a successful attorney, but I know overpaid under-achieving morons when I see them, and that is the HRC Board.  Joe Solmonese is a puppet, borrowed from Emily's List so that they could finally say there's a penis at HRC, but who lacks the ability to effectively lead, and thus simply does what he is told by the Board.

However, HRC does have its merits, in that it is such an entrenched bureaucracy in DC, it can occasionally get its voice heard.  Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.  But when you look at their budget, versus their accomplsihments, it looks like millions of dollars down the drain for the past 20 years.

But we did get to dress up for the gay prom once a year, so we got that going for us.

---

by: salemlawyer @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:35:03 PM CDT

I agree with Mixner

For those of you that want to know about Mixner/DADT/Clinton, look at Wiki.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...

---

by: max @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 12:49:00 PM CDT

don't deviate from a well-laid plan that hopefully will eventually lead to victory

I was wondering if anyone would pick up on this and apply it to the 2010 vs 2012 prop 8 debate.  I'm glad to see it only took until the first response.

---

by: Jake Gellar-Goad @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 13:06:04 PM CDT

David Mixner very publicly let Clinton know of his anger over DADT

I imagine that cost him plenty in access to the White House, and powerful Dems.
So DOMA isn't on Mixner, he broke publicly with Clinton over DADT.
That's the big trade off, you can give massive amount of money and just go along, or you can fight BACK and lose access.

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 14:47:11 PM CDT

Gay Stalemate.

You want to know why we are paralyzed as a community? Read thru this thread. For every point there is a counter point. Blah, blah, blah..... We are our own worst enemy. We don't even need an opposition. Stop looking for external leadership and ask yourself, "what have I done lately to advance the cause?" Your all so good at writing. Write! Your all so good at expressing your opinion. Share that opinion! Plain old regular people like Rosa Parks created change. Just like Dan Choi will. Just like Olson and Boies will. It won't be our gay leadership or this administration. It's US! We are the Change.

If we don't pass the Hate Crimes Bill, and get 220 co-sponsors in Congress for DADT repeal we have only ourselves to blame. We don't need a national organization to show us how to pick up the phone.  

Come, come, my conservative friend, wipe the dew off your spectacles, and see that the world is moving."
-Elizabeth Cady Stanton

---

by: T2inDC @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 18:28:45 PM CDT

Darn right.... REMEMBER CANADA!

When they achieved Full Equality... which feels just great to those I know who live there, all their pro-gay organizations faded away and disappeared.

Imagine poor JS without his six figue salary?!! What on earth would he do? They have to have NOTHING happen to keep their jobs. 

It's the Hammer of JUSTICE,
It's the Bell of FREEDOM,
It's the Song about LOVE between,
my Brothers and my Sisters
...All over this Land.

---

by: Orion45 @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 19:22:58 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

We Don't Need Another Hero

All the hand wringing over a proposed challenge to Proposition 8 in 2010, (we should wait), the Boies and Olsen lawsuit (it is dangerous, what if we lose?), Obama has a secret plan to help the GLBTQ community, just not now (don't alienate him as he is our best friend we have), etc., etc. Bla bla bla

ENOUGH ALREADY

If I have said it once, I will gladly say it 1000 times:

LEAD, FOLLOW, or GET THE FUCK OUT OF OUR WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There are plenty of us out here who are tired of waiting and are never going to slow down for the timid persons in this crowd.  I ask for your support, but if you chose not to give it, then please step aside.  

Thanks.

vanhattan

---

by: vanhattan @ Tue Jul 21, 2009 at 21:46:44 PM CDT