No one's perfect, but, yes, when it comes to national gay "leaders," Matt Foreman rocks. He also puts his body where his mouth is, as when he was arrested this spring protesting DADT in Times Square. Which brings me to the long-on-the-table question by Larry Kramer and others, including most recently Michael Petrelis—"Where's Waldo?" I mean, where's your contributer Joe HRC Solmonese in relation to protests such as the one in Ft. Lauderdale—or Times Square? I've never heard of him being arrested. Nor any other HRCette for that matter. They are primarily "Revolutionaries By Press Release," rarely leaving their multimillion dollar DC fortress except to vacuum up more money for their coffers. Yes, I know, Candi Gingrich came to Indy for y'all [BTW, about as bad a PR choice as could be made this side of Ross the Intern], but they still have no "street cred." The MO is the same as it's been for 26 years and look where we aren't. Bonus question: why is HRC shutting out NGLTF and Lambda Legal from the Logo Presidential candidates forum? Who ELECTED them our catch-all ambassadors?

Sorry, Leland, but I don't think it's a contest. While Matt is a contributor here, so are Joe and Candace. Pitting 3 folks from the same site against each other is rather bad form, my friend.

I would suggest that perhaps instead of making it a contest as to who's better at this or that, we celebrate the fact that as a community we have folks willing to put their necks on the line for us when we can't by doing all sorts of work that needs done. Hell, there's still lots more to do that no one's working on yet! After all, in a community as diverse as ours, surely we can be inclusive!

Sorry, Bill, but such a rejoinder suggests you lack what contributor Michael Crawford might call "righteous rage." I SINCERELY respect your commitment and contribution to the struggle for gay equality in one of our redder states, but, "forgive the cliche, it is far past time that a little of that be involved in a larger discussion centered upon "healing ourselves." It's not a "contest" I'm talking about but a holy war against us in which our self-proclaimed largest "army," our self-proclaimed "commander-in-chief" has failed and we will not win until this is corrected. Defenders of HRC, complete with "success takes time" excuses, sound exactly like Bush on Iraq, and his claims that liberals never talk about what good has been accomplished. If it is not unpatriotic to criticize him, why is it "bad form" to criticize HRC, whether or not its employees are among your contributors? I salute your progress, but is it to be just a carbon copy of countless other tunnel-visioned gay blogs; closed to critical thinking and analysis of our own; clothed in unclothed meat puppet ads? Are those the strains of "Kumbaya" I hear as you insist, "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain"?

Second Bonus Question [though you ignored the first one]: When did Margaret Carlson come out? HRC just announced she will be one of the moderators for the LOGO forum. Jonathan Capehart, an excellent choice, will be, too, but he IS very out. How 60s of HRC to have a discussion of our rights served to us on a straight platter.

OK, I just have to say that in the past week, we have been very vocally accused of being:

1. Too establishment

2. Too radical

3. Too harsh on the HRC

4. Too easy on the HRC

5. Too angry (i.e. "Chillax")

6. Too without "righteous rage"

7. Too "filled with rage"

8. Too sexual

9. Too anti-sex

10. Too Democrat (from conservatives)

11. Too Democrat (from radicals)

12. Too much like all the other gay blogs

13. Very different from all the other gay blogs

14. Not intellectual enough

15. Too inaccessible

AAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!! Someone tell me what to do!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I can't take it anymore!!!!!!

OK, specifically on what you're saying Leland, I think Bil was responding to the fact that you brought up Joe apropos nothing. He's not out there on this one. Whoopee. This isn't the central front on the war against inequality, and while it's great that Foreman showed up, it's not like everyone has to. If we're going to criticize HRC, which a lot of people have done on this site, then it's going to have to be for a good reason, not for skipping a Naugle rally.

And come on, being arrested for protesting DADT.... I mean, like, well, I suppose it's bad form to criticize other people's activism, but I don't think that demanding to be allowed to kill Iraqis is all that revolutionary, whether it occurred on a press release or not.

Alex,

My take on the whole criticism things is that if you are ducking buckshot coming from all directions, then you are doing something right.

Everyone has their opinions about what should be done and unfortunately most think that their opinions are the real answer that will win us equality.

We are not some kind of queer Borg and we all need to recognize that for our movement to grow in strength, numbers and political power we are going to have to utilize a multiplicity of tactics that are part of a larger coordinated strategy.

You should not worry about the criticism coming your way. Only begin to worry when they stop talking about you.

We are not some kind of queer Borg and we all need to recognize that for our movement to grow in strength, numbers and political power we are going to have to utilize a multiplicity of tactics that are part of a larger coordinated strategy.

Exactly, Michael. It's always irritating to me to hear "If we don't do it this way, we'll fail." How about we stop and let folks do what they're capable of instead of constantly telling others what to do? I've found through leading various coalitions that you get a lot more done if you let others tell you what they're willing and able to do!

As for the whole contributors thing, I'm just saying it's bad form to try and pick a fight between blog contributors. With Joe, Candace and Matt all blogging here, do you really expect any of them to answer you? Anything said could be turned, twisted and tangled up beyond belief. It's not worth starting a flame way over... *shrugs* Besides, leaving a comment to denigrate someone else on a post meant to lift someone else up is just in pure bad taste... With plenty of posts taking HRC to task on any number of worthwhile issues, leaving the comment here doesn't serve much purpose other than leaving Matt with a "Damn, they can't even compliment me without attacking someone else!"

You'll find that I don't mind criticizing any person or organization as long as it's done constructively. Pitting one person or org against another automatically produces a loser - and I don't think that's a position any of us want to be in when it comes to gay rights. Instead of a contest between two poles, why not just say your criticism and be done? As I've often said to various leaders in our community - just because you don't agree with someone doesn't make them your enemy. It just makes them a friend that you're disagreeing with.

There is a fine line here though. Not everyone can be reached with the same message, I'll give you that. Some people need the slow and steady approach of hrc, some need the in your face approach. The hard part is coordinating all that so we don't work at cross purposes.

I guess what I am saying is both approaches work with the right audience, and both are equally destructive in the wrong one. Neither are necessarily wrong or right, but both can be easily misguided.

Everyone has their opinions about what should be done and unfortunately most think that their opinions are the real answer that will win us equality.

I kinda like how most people get impassioned about their politics. Of course they think their opinions are the right ones - they wouldn't think them otherwise!

On the gay borg thing - oh hell no we aren't a gay borg. Gosh, it's like herding cats on here to get anything done, and I've only spent about the last 6 months involved in anything with a semblance of queer organizing.

It's a movement of raving individualists and huge personalities, I'm finding.

Attack of the contributors! All of these posts that get big discussions seem to always have at least 50% of the comments coming from contributors. That's great, but it's just like SWARMING THE READERS!!!! I guess that can be kinda fun.