Presidential debate on LGBT issues to air on LOGO

All Candidates Invited

But, I am not holding my breathe waiting for a Republican to show their face.

---

by: Bloggernista @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 14:27:05 PM CDT

Panel

Yes, Pam - definitely no offense to the panel, but why in the H is there not a journalist on there?

ee

---

by: Julien Sharp @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 14:51:55 PM CDT

Joe Solmonese?

:insert rant about HRC here:

I'm really happy to see this happen, and shouldn't whine, but:

Seriously, if it's a Democratic debate (or a debate about someone other than affluent white gay men) they might have considered inviting someone else.  And you're right, Pam, there are journalists that are LGBT.

---

by: eastsidekate @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 14:53:37 PM CDT

Stop Bashing HRC

Good grief -- who do you think set this up?

Democrats, given a choice, would do a 180 from the LGBT crowd. That this is happening is very, very significant.

---

by: S1 @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 15:38:03 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Revolutionary debate

Never in the history of American politics have presidential candidates been brought together to debate ?gay? issues. Pretty exciting stuff.  Historic.

Make alot of noise. Life is short.

---

by: Charley6 @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 20:11:10 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Why is HRC involved?

I was under the impression that HRC has firmly endorsed Hillary. In fact it is like they exist primarily as an extension of her campaign. They even custom-tailored their "survey" of gay issues to fit her campaign's statements and make her look good. Will they disclose their own bias?

It's good that they want to have this "debate" but somethin' don't smell right.

---

by: RandyH @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 15:02:13 PM CDT

Where's Jason Bellini?

If it is co-sponsored by LOGO then at least they should have Jason Bellini on the Panel. If we have to have an entertainer I would prefer Margaret Cho.

Still, there is this from the Press Release:

"In addition to questioning by Solmonese and Etheridge people will be able to pose their own questions through LOGOonline.com and HRC.org."

But who will pick the questions?

---

by: claudew @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 15:11:21 PM CDT

Logo on DirecTV

Anybody who gets DirecTV can watch it on Logo, channel 263.

---

by: lampster @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 15:34:32 PM CDT

Bitch, Bitch, Bitch

You fools are bitching about HRC, about not getting Logo, and about anything else you can think of.

What you're missing is the very, very important point that Democrats are NOT running from the LGBT community this year. No, the top tier candidates aren't backing marriage -- but, good grief, they're 100% with us on everything else.

Rally around the Democrats, people. Contribute, volunteer, and do your damnedest to elect a Democratic president next year ... and a Senate with a filibuster-proof majority of Democrats, and a House with a much larger Democratic majority, and Democrats all over your state.

Or, because you can't find the perfect Democrat, would you rather go back to Republicans running everything?

---

by: S1 @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 15:41:52 PM CDT

beg to differ

I've commented frequently about how the 2008 Dems have been out front and not avoiding LGBT issues, this prevents the GOP gay boogeyman meme from gaining traction. This venue is an historic opportunity.

I laud HRC for organizing this event with LOGO; in the same breath, it needs to be pointed out that it lends legitimacy to the debate if LGBT journalists are there. They've been covering the candidates and doing analysis of the issues at hand. To not include any is a big oversight. No one is saying Joe S. or Melissa E. shouldn't be there at all, but zero LGBT journalists?

Part of the reason the Covenant With Black America debate was interesting and informative is that black journalists were given a chance to shine -- they were not there to put on kid gloves.

The last thing we need is the impression that the panel is treating the candidates with kid gloves. Having LGBT journalists on the panel ensures this is not the case.

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 15:54:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I concur, but...

HRC works hard to advocate for the civil rights of gays and lesbians, and I applaud them for it.  I'm sure they were integral to setting up this debate.

However... having a celebrity and the head of an organization that's already heavily aligned with one of the candidates doesn't make this thing seem as "debate-y" as it should.  It is a huge step that Democrats are willing to appear in public and pay lip service to equality for gays and lesbians.

If this is going to be anything more than a look-how-much- better-we-are-than-the-Republicans love-fest (and, yes S1, point granted, the D's are less bad than the R's), there needs to be real journalists there asking tough questions, rather than Melissa and Joe simply sharing the love with the Democratic front runners.  Maybe next time.  For now, it's progress.

---

by: eastsidekate @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 16:53:17 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You are right

It sounds like it has all of the gravitas of MTV's "boxer or briefs" question.  Still, we never seem to get more than a scare question at the "normal" debates. So at least here there will be a chance to go beyond, "Do you support gay marriage".

I think they should take this as an opportunity to emphasize the diversity of the gay community.  When candidates are asked about social security, the Iraq War, affirmative action, and pretty much any other topic, that is us too, asking the questions and depending on the answers. Not that I think that we shouldn't focus on the laundry list of issues that are specifically urgent for gay people, but there is no reason that it should start and end with that.

What the hell was I doing in Oaxaca in 1992, on the eve of the Zapatista revolution?

---

by: Cambridge Kid @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 21:54:11 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Blonde Melissa Ethridge

Has a name as a GLBT leader, and that's good.  Lesbians can serve to bridge the gap in society because of their love for children and nesting abilities.  Rosie is confrontational whereas Melissa is subtle, but this is how one acheives power. 
Also most straight men don't have a problem seeing two women at the altar, unless one is their ex-wife.  Gay men are seen by most as the 24 hour party people with the stigma as the first group in this country to have AIDS.  Melissa is living in a same-sex marriage, and has world recognition for her song in Gore's "Inconvenient Truth".  I think it's good they chose her.  A GLBT Journalist?  Sirius talk show host and long time activist Michaelangelo Signorile could ask the tough questions to the candidates.  He would be the likely candidate, but might upstage Joe Solomonese.  Joe is with XM Satellite radio, and their are talks that XM and Sirius will merge waiting for FCC approval.

Make alot of noise. Life is short.

---

by: Charley6 @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 05:52:29 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Republicans are flipping out ...

As if on cue, the Republican haters are flipping out (no word from Log Cabin yet): http://www.freerepub...

Excerpts:

To: shortstop

If this doesn?t send a message to all conservatives and Christian voters then to heck with the country and all.
Where is the MORAL OUTRAGE against this immoral and disgusting lifestyle?
Or is this just one more little thing we?ll let pass as normal behavior?
How are you going to react when some homosexual is trying to indoctrinate or recruit your son or daughter?

59 posted on 07/10/2007 1:23:10 PM PDT by Joe Boucher

To: Elle Bee

Edwards is set to announce that he has been in a gay relationship for years...
with himself.

He was fearful of contracting AIDS from anonymous partners... so he tests himself regularly

He could never find a partner as pretty as...
himself

And this relationship that has him playing both roles fits into his...
Two Americas Theme

61 posted on 07/10/2007 1:23:36 PM PDT by GivemeaBREAK!

---

by: SanRafaelKid @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 15:41:52 PM CDT

I'm Happy They're Unhappy

It's a shame all the energy they put into homophobia and other evil deeds can't be put to some better use.

---

by: S1 @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 15:48:12 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Bravo HRC

I have been one of the biggest HRC bashers around, but this changes my outlook.  Bringing the candidates to the table, and hopefully they will be asked direct questions about same-sex Federal Marriage benefits and if Edwards is still not there yet with his wife.  Also, Hillary and DOMA.  What is her position.  We only hear whispers.  Obama has already said he will rescind it.  The glbt African Americans blew their chances to speak out and ask questions at the Covenant with Black America conference.  Not one question.

Make alot of noise. Life is short.

---

by: Charley6 @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 15:54:26 PM CDT

please prove me wrong

Glass half empty...I'm not expecting anything new to come out of this....I'm mean what part of repeal DOMA and DADT donn't they understand?  What part of ENDA wouldn'[t they harrange about?
If I hear one candidate give over marriage to states rights...I know them to be nothing but hot air.

---

by: Karen in Kalifornia @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 16:01:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Hillary

If she publically states that she wants to repeal DOMA, as she is said to have stated and reported on a marriage equality web site, that will be significant.

Make alot of noise. Life is short.

---

by: Charley6 @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 19:49:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

She specifically said she *wasn't*

going to try and repeal DOMA at the HRC dinner in her honor. She was going to repeal certain parts of it -- but *not* the definitions for the purpose of Federal activity.

She is interested in repealing DADT.

One thing that this "historic" event (kinda sad it has to be historic) does indicate is that they are starting to see that the LGBT community has a lot of people who vote their issues, their concerns -- just like the other side has their own hardcore group of people who have chosen to make us an issue.

And we're as big and as potent as the other group -- just less aligned politically.

Generally speaking, who I support for president is going to have a LOT to do with the way this event is pulled off and how they respond to tough questions.

They will avoid the tough questions, though.  None of them are LGBT. ALl of them are products of their times -- and all of them will have some irrational and incomplete understandings of what it means to be one of us.

So far, though, they are a hell of a lot better than the republicans.

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

---

by: dyssonance @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 02:56:53 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

OK, how many

of you expect to hear anything new or ever real out of this?

OK, how many expect to hear the same old non-answers as they dance around the issues that we LGBTQ folks want to hear about?

The fact that they're all (or most or some) going to participate does not mean that any of them is going to provide any substantive answers that differ significantly from the political rhetoric that we've already heard.

/rant /cynicism

---

by: Jami @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 16:11:44 PM CDT

Because they aren't people

They are actors reading scripts that are generated by a giant robot. The point is not to convince the actors, it is to change the robot. The fact that they are participating in an LGBT debate is very significant because it has never been done - in fact, in the past it was conventional wisdom that it would be political suicide. Ditto for civil unions, the now "safe" option.

Until we can find real leaders who will actually lead, rather than just follow conventional wisdom, it is conventional wisdom that we are up again. The cool thing is that CW is changing - fast.

What the hell was I doing in Oaxaca in 1992, on the eve of the Zapatista revolution?

---

by: Cambridge Kid @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 22:03:52 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The Bloomberg threat,

  I believe the top tier Dems know the GLBT community isn't happy with them, and they know that losing the GLBT vote would cost them.  As blog after blog, you read we have had it with them.

  I have said before, the time for the debate is now, and I am glad it is happening.  Let the wingers come out and beat thier bibles. Make them run to the far right.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 16:32:20 PM CDT

RIchardson

Interesting that he has not announced a plan to participate.  After all, he is supposed to 1) be pro-LGBT civil rights, and 2) remorseful over the anti-gay "i'm in the heterocentrist club with ya all the way, brother!" crap he spewed on Imus.

Why so silent, Bill?

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 18:55:52 PM CDT

Dodd and Edwards are in

Christopher Dodd and John Edwards have agreed to participate in the HRC/Logo debate. Hopefully the other candidates will accept their invitations soon.

---

by: Bloggernista @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 18:56:28 PM CDT

great potential

the candidates can spend an hour not saying anything new, or, they can use this as an opportunity to stand up strongly and together for equality.  it is, after all, the dem platform.

i wish one of the questioners could be angie paccione!

Click HERE and sign up: Campaign For Military Partners.

Lurleen on Twitter.

---

by: Lurleen @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 20:30:31 PM CDT

Interesting but not holding my breath

It's interesting to see that the candidates are getting out from behind the closet doors and meeting in the open with the GLBT community.  Even a large number of our mayoral candidates, except for the well-known Repug homophobe, have agreed to hold a debate for the Nashville GLBT community.  That being said I don't expect anything new from this.  I expect, much like we are hearing on this very blog, that they'll dance around it, but there will be a large contingent of gay folks butt-licking Democratic candidates simply because they got out behind their closet doors.  We'll be saying how brave they are for being seen with us in public and pull the levers for them anyway.  It would have nice to see our Blogmistress Pam there holding their feet to the fire. :)  HRC sure won't have the balls to do that, but oh well...they never asked my opinion anyway.

---

by: callie @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 20:54:15 PM CDT

0 to 60

I remember watching Bill Clinton's State of the Union addresses to see if he would say the word "gay" even once and then being ridiculously thrilled when he did.  Even if the participants spout the same stuff they've been spouting (how is that different from any other presidential debate?), to have the major candidates of any party spend an hour during a presidential campaign on television talking about LGBT issues with two members of our community is HUGE progress.  It strikes me as perhaps a smart move to include a panel member who is an entertainer (with a pretty significant straight following), which might broaden the audience of people tuning in. 

---

by: kt @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 21:06:52 PM CDT

Who wants to take odds on whether any Republican candidate will attend?

I think there's a chance RonPaulmight attend, but he's really  a  Libertarian.

What say you?


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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 10, 2007 at 21:51:57 PM CDT

Andrew Sullivan is already panning it ...

Sully says the debate is disgusting because it is another minority grabbing for "special rights". Got I hate hypocrite Sully. It seems like the only thing that gets him off is to degrade other people.

---

by: SanRafaelKid @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 22:16:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Anderson Cooper is the MC for the wrong debate....LOL

---

by: underbear1 @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 22:36:36 PM CDT

Besides Pam Spaulding,

  Who are the other media people you suggest to attend?

  What are your concerns regarding this debate?  Lets send HRC a letter, from all off us here at the blend.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 22:41:51 PM CDT

Doug Ireland

I'd like to see Doug Ireland of the Village Voice and Gay City News.

---

by: Jim @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 23:06:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Rachel Maddow

How about Rachel Maddow from Air America? I really like her when I see her on Olbermann's show.

---

by: RandyH @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 00:15:27 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

How about Olbermann?

He's not specifically LGBTQ (is he?) but I'd be willing to bet he'd be happy to stir up some shit.

---

by: Jami @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 11:38:01 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'd like to see Larry Kramer grill them

---

by: underbear1 @ Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 23:52:19 PM CDT

A Little Perspective

While I would have had a different or at least bigger panel, I  would suggest that we read some of the comments at the Huffington Post for a little perspective.

Look at some of the comments of Democrats:

"I really think a debate about Gay Rights by the candidates of the Democratic Party is a bad idea. It's not like we have to show our support for the cause. You don't see Rudy, Mitt, Newt & Fred debating about low taxes or a strong military, do you?"

"Is another election going to revolve around discussing gays?

I'd much rather the candidates discuss something substantive, like the spending bill Congress is voting on this week that gives another $649 billion of our taxes to the Pentagon."

It's easy to forget that the liberal/progressive blogs aren't necessarily representative of even liberals let alone the Democratic Party.

Let's remember who the enemy is. It's not HRC. I have had my disagreements with them in the past and I'm sure I will have more in the future, but they deserve praise here for doing something that is really historic and still, unfortunately, very controversial.

---

by: claudew @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 00:13:10 AM CDT

And that is why

I have not faith in the Democratic Party either.

These are the loudmouths of the Democratic Party that just want us to shut up and vote the Democratic block no matter what the cost to us personally.

These are the same brand of people like my "friends" I recently posted about that say "I love you, but..."

As I get older and have more at stake personally, I don't have patience for this bullshit.

You want our votes?  Then fucking deal with us ya chickenshits.

---

by: callie @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 08:12:59 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Augh

NO faith, not NOT faith!!!  Jeez...time for my morning caffeine ritual.

---

by: callie @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 08:13:53 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

debate has already happened

claudew,
went and cked out comments at Huffington...
I see what you mean.
Who needs enemies when we have "friends" like these...Makes me ask what's worst...fundies who have no qualms about cruifiying glbt citizens or readers of demo blogs who just as soon throw us under the bus?

---

by: Karen in Kalifornia @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 12:30:58 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Debate?

Call me a wet blanket but, debate?

"The panelists in a statement said they plan to cover a range of issues including relationship recognition, marriage equality, workplace fairness, the military, hate crimes, HIV/AIDS and other important issues"

I don't see ANY of these issues as debatable.  They are obvious and should not be up for debate!  What is there to debate about them?  Should people who are HIV pos be treated or not?  Marriage equality? well that crap has been going on since the 80's and well, I am kind of sick and tired of "debates" about it.  GIVE ME THE F$%KING RIGHTS ALREADY!  Military?  Please, they only are talking about it now because they need more bodies.  Hate crimes?  Debate about hate crimes?  Isn't it about time to start doing the correct thing and stop "debating" whether or not someone or a group of someones who beat to death another because of their orientation is a bad thing and just pass the F#$KING laws!

A debate about GLBT issues sounds kind of insulting.

---

by: HDBiker @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 07:06:14 AM CDT

When you put it that way

Yeah it does sound insulting.

---

by: callie @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 08:10:24 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I still

remember Good Ol' Bill courting us then immediately signing DODT.  Talk is cheap especially from a politician millionaire.

---

by: HDBiker @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 08:33:09 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Uh, huh

And I remember seeing Melissa Etheridge up there with KD Lang and thinking something good was finally going to happen.

Yeah, right!

---

by: callie @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 10:09:04 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Don't

blame us for being cynical about this "debate" (wink)

---

by: HDBiker @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 11:07:11 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

LOGO Debate

I think Doug Ireland would be great to add, Rachel Maddow would be terrific, too.  I'm sure that the format could be arranged for all kinds of good questions to be asked by a number of people. 

"You are the rest of the world."

---

by: TomChicago @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 07:19:56 AM CDT

Not Our Only Opportunity

Some of you are acting like this is our only opportunity ever to ask the presidential candidates about LGBT civil rights. Its so not. HRC and Logo are doing something really cool here and I think rather than spending so much criticizing them for not having you top choice as a panelist and other things. We should really be talking about how we can best take advantage of this opportunity and even more broadly how each of us can take action to encourage the presidential candidates to take bolder positions on our issues and take action to make LGBT equality a reality.

The candidates will be holding campaign events, rallies, town hall meetings etc in the various states that we live in. What is stopping any of you from gathering your friends and attending these events and raising the questions that you think are important? Want to know exactly why Clinton does not support marriage for same-sex couples? Show up at an event and ask the question. Want to know what is Obama's plan to repeal DADT? Show up and ask him. Want to know what is Richardson's plan to improve the lives of LGBT youth? Ask him.

There is far too much at stake here to expect one organization to do all of the heavy lifting. We all have a role to play and frankly a moral duty to do more than type angry comments on a blog. Don't wait for HRC to raise the questions that you want answered. Raise the questions yourselves.

---

by: Bloggernista @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 09:05:14 AM CDT

If

this was directed at my post.

"We all have a role to play and frankly a moral duty to do more than type angry comments on a blog. "

Then excuse the F out of me.  I do find it insulting that a cable channel distributed by corporate media is planning on making more money exploiting us and a lobby group is going to use this as another excuse to attempt to wring out my wallet.  HRCF REALLY DROPPED THE BALL IN '04 here in Ohio and it took a grass roots effort to fight the change in Ohio?s constitution.  HRCF was no where to be heard, I did call them pleading and all I got was BS.  Now all I get are calls wanting more money but I have yet to see results.  This is really nothing more than an attempt to yet again, exploit us politically and monetarily then shit all over us again. 

---

by: HDBiker @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 09:17:13 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Where is HRC on this?

Hello!!!! we still need you, Where are you?????  Oh yea, fundraising.

Anti-bullying policy OK'd

After arguing, state board deletes reference to taunts based on sexual orientation

Wednesday,  July 11, 2007 6:13 AM

By Catherine Candisky

THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

The State Board of Education adopted a model anti-bullying policy yesterday after removing reference to "taunts based on ethnicity, gender, religion (and) sexual orientation."

Those arguing to keep the language said the board's hourlong debate boiled down to a question of whether gay students should be explicitly protected from taunts and harassment.

Countering those who maintained they opposed the suggested language merely because it was repetitive and unnecessary, Robin C. Hovis, a board member from Millersburg, said, "Let's say what this is. The issue is inclusion of homosexuality."

Crafted at the direction of the General Assembly, the model policy is to help local school districts create their own guidelines.

The 19-member board approved the stripped-down version by a vote of 17-2 at its monthly meeting in Columbus. Moments earlier, the panel rejected an effort to keep the controversial language by a vote of 11-8.

Board members who prevailed said a more general paragraph in the policy prohibiting "threats, taunts and intimidation through words and/or gestures" was sufficient.

They also said reference to sexual orientation could make some school officials uneasy.

"The language will be a concern in some districts," said Colleen D. Grady of Strongsville.

Hovis and others argued that providing specific examples of bullying would help districts when considering their own policies.

G. R. Schloemer, of Cincinnati, said he wanted to keep the language "to ensure that administrators dealt with issues and didn't brush any aside based on personal biases or beliefs."

John R. Bender of Avon noted that Gov. Ted Strickland recently signed an executive order prohibiting workplace discrimination against gay and transgendered state workers.

"Let's make sure students have the same protections," said the former state legislator.

Susan M. Haverkos of West Chester said the legislature did not share that view.

A 21-word paragraph was removed from the 16-page policy. Listed under "examples of conduct that could constitute prohibited behaviors," the offending paragraph read:

"Verbal taunts, name-calling and put-downs, including taunts based on ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual orientation or other protected and/or individual characteristics."

Other examples the board left in the policy included: physical violence; extortion; using the Web to circulate gossip and rumors; and sending abusive or threatening instant messages.

The model policy follows the passage of legislation in December that requires all districts to have an anti-bullying policy in place by the end of the year.

ccandisky@dispatch.com

---

by: HDBiker @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 09:20:22 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

re: If

Like I said, you can complain on a blog all day or you step away from your keyboard and join the fray. Its a lie to say that HRC was not involved in helping to fight the anti-gay constitutional amendment in Ohio.

And, Equality Ohio was in formation before our side lost on the amendment fight.

Its fine if you don't care for HRC or its work. Then just don't support them. I give my money and my time to organizations that I think are running a smart strategy and moving the ball forward. I don't trash the other organizations, except for maybe Log cabin Republicans.

We can waste a lot of time complaining about what HRC is or isn't doing or we can take that energy and do whatever it is we wish they would do.

There is so much work to do and not nearly enough people doing it. Focus on the Family alone has a larger budget than HRC, NGLTF, GLAAD, GLSEN and PFLAG combined. And, Focus on the Family is just one organization out to destroy us.

You clearly have great passion and love for the LGBT community, as do I. I just think that we can more successful in achieving equality by recognizing that we need as many people as possible, working in as many locations as possible, using as many tactics as possible toward our common goal of equality.

---

by: Bloggernista @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 10:33:35 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well if you

need to hear it for your delicate ego; you are doing a stupendous job getting our issues in the forefront of this election cycle and I know this will be our time in the lime light. You go!!  Feel better?  Pardon me for being jaded, but I don't care to be screwed again by politicians, corporations, and lobbyists w/o a condom or breakfast.

---

by: HDBiker @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 11:12:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just drinks are fine by me

If I'm going to get screwed, I don't wanna see the jerk in the morning.

---

by: callie @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 12:47:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

equaility ohio

This is an organization that is actually doing something outside of issuing press releases and begging for money

http://www.equalityo...

It was started on '04 when HRC dropped the ball on the constitutional amendment issue #1.

---

by: HDBiker @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 09:38:33 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Exactly - and Pam could help create some of those opportunities.

Pam, you (and we) sometimes forget the power that you have, or could have, if you would only exercise it. You have one of the most influential LGBT political blogs in the country.

First off, you can pick up the phone and call Mr. Joe Solmonese and ask him if you could submit a question or two on behalf of your readers.

Moreover, you can produce your own questionnaire to these candidates and publish their responses. Maybe one or two might even come here as a guest blogger to take questions.

Be bold.

---

by: claudew @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 09:40:39 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Extend the invitation

to come on here.  I'd be VERY interested in seeing who responds and then who actually decides to show up.

---

by: Jami @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 11:42:29 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Stage-managed nonsense

It appears that Mike Gravel has not been invited to participate in the debate.  Way to go.  Snub the candidate who actually supports equality.

I honestly believe that the purpose of HRC is not to convince politicians to support our issues.  It's to convince us to support (establishment) politicians.

"Our Liberties We Prize and Our Rights We Will Maintain" -- Iowa state motto

---

by: Sportin' Life @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 12:42:43 PM CDT

It's to convince us to support (establishment) politicians.

Ding, ding, ding...you win the nail on the head award!

---

by: callie @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 12:46:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

And to use John Edwards' words,

  "I am not there yet"  as in voting for any of these top tier hopefuls.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 12:55:58 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

ohh now

don't be a keyboard hater (wink).  Remember HRC is your friend, they are shielding us from those awful politicians who actually want us to have our rightful civil rights, like Gravel and Kucinich do.  Don't forget, corporate America is your friend when they want something from you, mainly your money.

---

by: HDBiker @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 12:55:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

HRC's Numbers

Here are HRC's numbers if anyone whould like to do more than just be pissy on a keyboard

  Phone Front Desk: 202/628-4160 TTY: 202/216-1572 Toll-Free: 800/777-4723 Membership Toll-Free: 800/727-4723

---

by: HDBiker @ Wed Jul 11, 2007 at 13:07:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]