Michael Crawford

Hate Crimes Bill Dead for This Year

Filed By Michael Crawford | December 06, 2007 12:39 PM | comments

Filed in: Politics
Tags: anti-gay conservatives, anti-gay violence, Congress, Democrats, gay rights, hate crimes against LGBT people, Republicans, United ENDA

Have the Democrats Killed the Hate Crimes Bill?:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev) and Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.)Thursday morning acquiesced to demands by House Democratic leaders to drop a gay and transgender inclusive hate crimes bill from the National Defense Authorization Act, a knowledgeable Capitol Hill source said.

The decision kills the hate crimes bill for this year, but House Democrats, led by gay Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), are calling on the Senate to pass a freestanding hate crimes bill as early as February.

Senate Democrats had hoped to pass the DOD authorization bill with the hate crimes measure in tact, saying it was the best strategy for discouraging President Bush from vetoing the hate crimes measure, which Bush opposes.

This is another example of the Democratic majority caving in to the demands of the Republican minority. Your would think that the Republicans still ran Congress.

We know that the majority of Republicans in Congress oppose any kind of legislation that can be seen as LGBT so it isn't surprising that they opposed the hate crimes bill. The Democrats, on the other hand, have long received the majority of LGBT votes and campaign contributions, but have failed to pass meaningful LGBT civil rights legislation.

Some LGBT advocacy also have to share in the defeat this bill. The nearly 400 groups that came together under the United ENDA banner failed to speak out in support of the hate crimes even though it includes both sexual orientation and gender identity. United ENDA banded together to oppose a sexual orientation ENDA, but was absolutely silent when it became apparent that the hate crimes bill was in danger.


Recent Entries Filed under Politics:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


Yeah, I share your outrage at the UnitedENDA hypocrites. One thing is for the democrats to betray us; it is another thing for our movement leaders to do so. Disgusting.

If the Senate does in fact follow through with this, I hope there's a shitstorm of angry LGBT individuals and organizations swearing off any political support to the Democratic party.

I for one lobbied to keep the hate crimes protections in the defense bill. So I'd appreciate it if you didn't refer to me as a hypocrite.

The larger problem is that there was very little in the way to a call to action -- in part because of the murkiness about what was doing on. Live by the back-room deal, die by the back-room deal...


Michael Crawford Michael Crawford | December 6, 2007 1:32 PM

Lena,

I did not refer to you as a hypocrite. i simply point out that United ENDA was MIA in the hate crimes fight. Some individual members of the coalition may have lobbied, as a coalition there was not the outcry that accompanied they debate around ENDA,

I would expect United ENDA coalition based in washington especially to know that we would face difficulty in getting the hate crimes bill. this should have been obvious after the fight over keeping gender identity in ENDA.

Yeah, I share your outrage at the UnitedENDA hypocrites. One thing is for the democrats to betray us; it is another thing for our movement leaders to do so. Disgusting.

Fuck that noise. It's not like UnitedENDA was actively lobbying against the Hate Crimes Bill as HRC was secretly doing to the inclusive ENDA. Does opposing one bill mean you oppose the other? Nope.

On a different note:
Does any contributor/commenter have stats on the ability of hate crimes legislation to reduce violence against the communities they're designed to protect? I’m curious.

Way to misconstrue what I said, Lena. I was talking about the UnitedENDA crowd as a whole based on what the majority of it has done; I did not assert that so and so individual is a hypocrite in particular. For example, someone might use the generalization that Sundays suck because everything closes early. This, however, should not be interpreted that Sundays cannot suck, for there is always an exception. It's a form of speech. Another example would be to say that Republicans are gay-unfriendly. The statement is still acceptable because, even though there are gay-friendly Republicans, one is speaking about the group's general behavior/stance, not the particular behavior/stance of each single Republican.

"Fuck that noise. It's not like UnitedENDA was actively lobbying against the Hate Crimes Bill as HRC was secretly doing to the inclusive ENDA. Does opposing one bill mean you oppose the other? Nope."

It is peculiar, though, how so many people and organizations raised a shitstorm for one issue, but not for another that is equally pertinent to the community. It becomes especially aggravating when the shitstorm was raised on a bill that would not survive a presidential veto, while there was no speaking out for a bill that had an incredibly higher chance of being passed. Of course, feel free to "fuck" whatever you want whenever it's a distasteful concept for you to grasp.

I did not refer to you as a hypocrite. i simply point out that United ENDA was MIA in the hate crimes fight. Some individual members of the coalition may have lobbied, as a coalition there was not the outcry that accompanied they debate around ENDA,

Maybe United ENDA is an organization that's focused on ENDA instead of hate crimes legislation.

I don't know where I'd get a silly idea like that.

Are We Really Surprised?,/b>

I am not


Susan Robins

Michael Crawford Michael Crawford | December 6, 2007 1:46 PM

Isn't the LGBT focused on a variety of issues and not just ENDA? Wouldn't passage of the hate crimes which includes gender identity help to make it easier for members of Congress to support an inclusive ENDA?

"The larger problem is that there was very little in the way to a call to action -- in part because of the murkiness about what was doing on. Live by the back-room deal, die by the back-room deal..."

This is an outright lie. We had fair warning in advance about certain paths some Democrats in the senate where advocating for. There was a complete lack of immediate scorn by organizations who had so vocally scorned and vilified Pelosi and Frank right after the exclusive ENDA was announced.

There were no letters written by 400+ organizations to the senate voicing their opposition to the suggestion of dropping The Matthew Sheppard Act from the DoD bill. Not a single person was taken to task. Sure, most--if not all-- people for the UnitedENDA don't oppose the bill, but it remains a fact that the group as a whole did not do nearly as much advocacy for this bill as they did for the ENDA issue; and, in this case, inaction has brought as equally bad a resolution to the Hate Crimes bill as having opposed it would have.

Of course, feel free to "fuck" whatever you want whenever it's a distasteful concept for you to grasp.

HAHA. That made me laugh out loud. Seriously!!

Anyway, Alex, I’m not too crazy about your response that UnitedENDA formed only to focus on ENDA and had no responsibility to address the Hate Crimes legislation. That’s too close to gays defending HRC problems with race/class issues with “Well they are a GAY organization!” Know what I mean?

That said, I think it’s important to realize that UnitedENDA was about so much more than merely opposing a single bill. These organizations were making a statement about the direction of the GLBT movement in terms of inclusion and values. So it’s kind of ‘apples to oranges’ to suggest that UnitedENDA is just a big gay group that focused on one bill while ignoring a second, potentially more feasible, bill. UnitedENDA was really about defining the GLBT movement as trans-inclusive, and not so much about actually lobbying politicians.

"Maybe United ENDA is an organization that's focused on ENDA instead of hate crimes legislation.

I don't know where I'd get a silly idea like that."

I don't know where I get the silly idea that the organizations comprising the UnitedENDA effort should also support the hate crimes legislation seeing as how those organizations were originally dedicated to improving the legal condition of LGBTs in ALL facets of their lives. I'll find you hard-pressed to say that 400+ organizations coalesced with the intention of only focusing their attention on the ENDA debacle even after their position was made clear to those who were considering the available bills.

Lots of those orgs, as you pointed out, did lobby in favor of the bill. Just not as united ENDA, which wasn't all that much more than a letter and a webpage.

A lot of those orgs don't really have a place to lobby for something like this, like the "Bi Writers Association" and "Freedom to Marry".

Just sayin', you're portraying UnitedENDA as a lot more than it actually is. Blame the individual orgs if you want to. Or maybe that one org that got the bill attached to the defense spending bill or that other that tries to get gays to vote for Republicans....

"HAHA. That made me laugh out loud. Seriously!!"

I'm glad that with such a disappointing situation, I have proved to be some source of humorous relief.

"UnitedENDA was really about defining the GLBT movement as trans-inclusive, and not so much about actually lobbying politicians. "

Well, considering they sent a letter to politicians stating their position and trying to convince them to join it, I don't see how it does not constitute both the redefinition of the movement and a lobbying attempt.

Maybe we should move this discussion to gmail chat?

Color me unsurprised.

This is, after all, what the Democratic leadership does, mouth the words of inclusion, all the while selling out the little guy. Of course in this case the Dems were pandering to even larger and more influential group so gays and lesbians had to join us trannys in walking the plank.

Thanks HRC, for showing Congress that this kind of politics is still perfectly acceptable...now step up here and join us on the chopping block.

Michael Crawford Michael Crawford | December 6, 2007 2:04 PM

Attaching the hate crimes language to the defense bill was seen as the best way to get the bill through the Senate by the bill's sponsors. The bills are also the ones to write the legislation not that one organization aka HRC. As we saw during the debate around ENDA, the members of Congress don't always take into account the wishes of HRC.

United ENDA was AWOL on this issue and that has to be said. Now what's going to happen is these same groups will criticize HRC who did the bulk of the lobbying in favor of the hate crimes.

"Anyway, Alex, I’m not too crazy about your response that UnitedENDA formed only to focus on ENDA and had no responsibility to address the Hate Crimes legislation. That’s too close to gays defending HRC problems with race/class issues with “Well they are a GAY organization!” Know what I mean?"

I think it's different. I don't really see any problem with an org focusing on one issue as long as they don't leave people behind. That's the difference between the ENDA split and civil right leg in the 60's, as some have compared the incrementalism of the latter to the split in the former, is that the civil rights leg didn't split along the lines of who was included, but what issues were.

You're right - it was about the focus of the movement and not just about the ENDA, but it's not really an org in the first place anyway. It was a way to discuss a coalition of disparate groups around one issue. It's not like the elected leadership or you could donate money their way or anything.

Lucrece~

Fine. Let's write a letter to "Health Initiatives for Youth" and "Straight Spouse Network" for not doing enough to pass hate crimes leg.

Oh, but I'm speaking of UnitedENDA as the coalition of those individual organizations that blatantly ignored the threat to the Matthew Sheppard Act after fervently screaming bloody betrayal at the Democrats.

Furthermore, I'm not talking about whether those organizations that comprised the UnitedENDA supported the hate crimes bill or not. I'm discussing the dishonesty in their following decision not to engage in the same behavior when the hate crimes bill was in question.

Perhaps I did not post as clearly as I could, so here goes: This is not an attack on the UnitedENDA purpose; this is a critique on the organizations that comprised it which later chose not to do anything of the kind for an equally important bill, despite their claims of serving the LGBTs' interests. LGBT interests include hate crimes legislation.

Michael Crawford Michael Crawford | December 6, 2007 2:11 PM

Alex,

If they could get all riled about ENDA and call for the defeat of a sexual orientation, who could have call for the passage of the hate crimes bill? Its was a pro:LGBT legislation that could have been the first piece of LGBT civil rights legislation to pass Congress. United ENDA claimed to represent 2 million LGBT people. Are hate crimes not an issue for that 2 million people.

I am not talking about groups l like the ones you mentioned, but groups like NGLTF which claims to represent the grassroots, but has set on the sidelines.

"Fine. Let's write a letter to "Health Initiatives for Youth" and "Straight Spouse Network" for not doing enough to pass hate crimes leg."

How about we actually do it? After all, if it was not a stretch for them to advocate for an inclusive ENDA, a purpose unrelated to their organization's prime purpose, I don't see why they would not advocate for an equally LGBT-pertinent issues such as hate crimes. They opened the door by taking an unrelated pro-LGBT stance.

Rebecca got it right: HRC showed the Dems how easy it is to drop GLBT legislation because it mysteriously no longer has the votes to pass.

Any response on whether or not hate crimes legislation actually reduces the occurrence of hate crimes?

Also, did anyone catch Project Runway last night? I fell asleep halfway through!

"Any response on whether or not hate crimes legislation actually reduces the occurrence of hate crimes?"

This is an irrelevant question, seeing as how the legislative body considered it worthwhile to pass hate crimes legislation for other categories. This is a matter of fairness.

Also, the Matthew Sheppard Act not only intends to lower the occurrence of hate crimes against the LGBT, but it also enables federal entities to take action on LGBT hate crimes that local entities does not want to touch on, which happens fairly often in states like Alabama and the kind. It also allows for more accurate design of LGBT hate crimes statistics, as the FBI only counts LGBT hate crimes in states where there is actually LGBT-inclusive hate crimes legislation.

They did it in '04 too, Nick. After John Kerry came out in opposition to transgender inclusion in ENDA in HRC's Presidential questionnaire, HRC still gave him a 100% rating. Since HRC made it so easy for a powerful Democrat to discriminate then, it wasn't too surprising that soon afterward Kerry came out in favor of a state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in Massachusetts.

How many times, I wonder, must history repeat itself before these people finally get a clue?

Actually, Lucrece, until now hate crimes against the transgendered have not been tracked by the FBI or any entity other than our own community (in the person of Ethan St. Pierre), and they won't be until the Matthew Shepard Act passes into law.

Michael Crawford Michael Crawford | December 6, 2007 2:35 PM

But Rebecca HRC is now the lead organization that fought for an inclusive hate crimes bill. They may have been little slow on the uptake, they have been involved in working to pass state bills that are gender identity as well.

HRC is not perfect. None of our organizations are.

I'm dropping out of this comments discussion because I have other things to be doing, it's been real.

Lucrece~

OMG, we so should. Actually, we should just send it to the "Long Island Lesbian Cancer Initiative" and place the blame squarely on their shoulders. I'd so love to see what we'd get in response to a letter that said:

Dear Long Island Lesbian Cancer Initiative,

Hate crimes leg didn't pass. It's all your fault! How could you let this happen? How? Howl!

You seriously got some 'splainin' to do. We await your response.

XXOOXO,

Lucrece and Alex Blaze


Nick~

Negative on the Project Runway.


Michael~

The difference on the two issues for these groups is that the ENDA split was about the future of community activism and basically defining what it means to be queer, LGBT, gay, trans, etc. All those orgs had a direct stake in that.

If the individual members of those groups cared about hate crimes leg, they could have gone through other orgs. Because the individual people in those orgs weren't members of United ENDA, which isn't really an org in the first place in the same way that Task Force, HRC, etc. are.

I think that this mainly comes down to the Stonewall Democrats, the Task Force, and the NCTE, the biggest orgs on that list with a stake in hate crimes leg. A cursory glance at their webpages shows that they're at least saying that they were lobbying in favor of hate crimes leg, so obviously this is something that's beyond my expertise. What exactly do you want those orgs to have done? Are there other ones on the list that are important to this as well? Are they lying about their lobbying efforts (entirely possible)?

And yeah, I keep on posting the names of rather small groups here mainly to show that the "400 to 1" arg was silly in the first place. Let's talk people, resources, strategy, and goals, not some cherry-picked claim to a non-sensical interpretation of democracy in an inherently undemocratic process.


Becky~

Good point. This all comes down to whom it's OK to sell out, and gays aren't that much higher on the Democratic Party's totem pole than the T-folk.

"Actually, Lucrece, until now hate crimes against the transgendered have not been tracked by the FBI or any entity other than our own community (in the person of Ethan St. Pierre), and they won't be until the Matthew Shepard Act passes into law."

My mistake, thanks for the clarification, Rebecca. I should have mentioned this, as I am sure I became cognizant of this when I took a look at the breakdown and it only listed sexual orientation. Nevertheless, this fact does not refute my point about your question.

Alex~

Names should be listed in alphabetical order.

I'd be interested if only it represented the position I presented, to which you responded tangentially.

"The difference on the two issues for these groups is that the ENDA split was about the future of community activism and basically defining what it means to be queer, LGBT, gay, trans, etc. All those orgs had a direct stake in that."

That would have easily been achieved by asserting their stance on the issue in their individual websites. The letter was written strictly as a lobbying attempt.

"But Rebecca HRC is now the lead organization that fought for an inclusive hate crimes bill. They may have been little slow on the uptake, they have been involved in working to pass state bills that are gender identity as well."

Fighting for inclusion in a bill where there's little opposition is easy, Michael. Standing up for what's right even when the going gets rough is hard. That's the test of a real advocate, and that's where HRC fails miserably, every single time.

This whole experience has shown that Transgender people have no allies who wheeled any significant political power.

It also shows that Gays like democrats will sell out Transgender people in a heartbeat.

Hay
I told Y'all so years ago.

You know what the definition of insanity is?

Someone who keeps doing the same thing expecting a different result.

Have a nice day everyone.


Susan Robins

bill perdue | December 6, 2007 4:55 PM

Several months ago I pointed out that it was a travesty that an anti-violence bill should be appended to a funding bill that gives to the Badr Brigades of grand ayatollah al-Sistani. These jihadists armed by the US hunt down and butcher GLBT folk in Iraq. Hundreds of our brothers and sisters have been murdered by them. One victim was a 14 year old boy of unknown sexuality who was hacked to death because he was too ‘pretty.’

No one knew, but everyone suspected that making the Shepard bill a rider would doom it but we had to wait until the Democrats made us walk the plank. It’s preposterous to claim that UnitedENDA could have prevented this although it’s legitimate to criticize those who didn’t anticipate it. Did those who now spuriously attack UnitedENDA do that? Why do they blame UnitedENDA instead of the treachery of Democrats?
Democrat loyalists are in all respects like abused spouses who refuse to get help, sign the arrest warrant or leave big daddy.
ENDA was STRIKE ONE. Transgendered rights and everything of value were stripped from the Democrat version of ENDA and then the bones were picked clean by Republican amendments. The Democrat version of ENDA won't fly in the courts. Frank, Pelosi and most Democrats and Republicans abandoned everyone in the LGBT equation to the tender mercies of bosses and managers who virtually mint money underpaying us and discriminating against us in hiring and firing.

It's true that Franks obvious contempt for transgendered people emboldened a few bigots in our ranks but the fight was never between GLB'S and T's; it's always been a fight between all of us and the Democrats and Republicans.

The Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes bill was STRIKE TWO. Will the failure to repeal Bill Clintons DADT be STRIKE THREE? What bizarre convoluted logic will Democrat loyalists use to blame that on UnitedENDA, instead of the Democrats? I can’t wait.

In response to this latest treachery we should form campaign committees to demand their passage, and in the case of ENDA the passage of the original, workable form. Our people are getting fired and underpaid everyday. We get harassed and abused every day and each year 20 or more of us are lynched and thousands beaten. www.nvacp.org Those figures are obviously not a problem for the rightwing fat cats in Congress so it's up to us to make it a problem for them.

As Benjamin Franklin said "We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately."

Today the Harvard Institute of Politics released a new poll (don't worry, it's legit, HRC had nothing to do with it) which said that only 30% or youth think the two major parties are doing an adequate job and that 37% think a third party is needed.

With Democrats like these who needs Republicans?

donal1944@msn.com

I knew something was missing until bill's signature wall of text hit this thread ;D.

The precedent for fucking us over was set by the ENDA debacle. Now the Democrats can go into the presidential elections without having any taint of passing gay rights legislation.

Did they vote in favor of it? Sure! Any good Dem would! But did they get it turned into law? Hell no. What would they dangle in front of our noses?

Don't forget - a lot of the Democrats make a lot of money by being "pro-gay." If we got everything we wanted this year - ENDA and hate crimes - what would we ask for next? *gulp* Could it be marriage or more HIV/AIDS funding research?

And how could that (especially marriage) affect the election? Bah.

Hay Bil is it any wonder that Congress's approval rating has sunk to 11%

Take care
Sue

Good Comment Bill.
It should be noted that the public at large has the lowest approval rating for both this President and congress ever.

Is it really any wonder?

Take care
Sue

From the viewpoint of an Australian... I thought UnitedENDA was about, you know, ENDA. Not DADT or the MSA.

And if we find we don't have enough votes, we don't give up, we try changing some. You obviously do things differently in the US.

bill perdue | December 6, 2007 6:10 PM

Lucrece - Was it bad to post once with a cogent analysis backed by solid fact?

Or should I have done 13 posts defending the preposterous theroy that this was all UnitedENDA's fault instead of the eh the bigots who own the Democratic and Republicans parties?

Sue - and they've still got a year to go. Maybe we'll see the first below zero polling in history.

Democrat loyalists are in all respects like abused spouses who refuse to get help, sign the arrest warrant or leave big daddy.

If it were up to me Bill
We would be marching on Washington DC with buckets of tar and feathers.

Maybe even.....

Never mind.

The first sign of the loss of freedom and the beginning of a police state is that your representatives no longer listen to the will of the people...

Pray For America She was once a beacon of freedom.


Susan Robins

bill~ I was being humorous. I must thank you for proceeding to ump the guns and invent a strawman of a theory from the(my)comments you misconstrued in order to assault me, though! Point me exactly where I say that the blame of this debacle rests solely on UnitedENDA. So much for being "factual," eh?

The Hate Crimes Act failure was the logical end result of the new Democratic tactic of "incrementalism" applied to legislative effectiveness. If it made good sense to skive off the trannies from ENDA to get it apporved, it made even more sense to cut the gays and Lesbians out of the Military Apporpriations Act to whip up votes and get a legislative win.

When it was the trannies, we saw incrementalism as tactics. When it is us we see it as immoral, which it is.

We are American Citizens. We deserve the rights of all other American Citizens and we deserve them now! No more incrementalism, no more begging from a position of weakness for crumbs from the feast of human rights enjoyed by others. No one gets our support unless they support our complete equality NOW, no more learnign to love someone who offers us permanent second class status.

We speak for ourselves from here on out. No more of a congressionally appointed representative and his "chosen people," the HRC. American Citizenship, like the gay rights movement, came out of an uprising and a revolution. If it takes demonstrating, disrupting, and upsetting the political status quo by denying front runners our votes in favour of our real friends, so be it. In doing so we change the nature of democratic politics forever.

Lucrece: ”Yeah, I share your outrage at the UnitedENDA hypocrites. One thing is for the democrats to betray us; it is another thing for our movement leaders to do so."

1) Its UnitedENDA, the name says it all and reserving the question of single issue focus for later, where was the betrayal? What act of betrayal occurred?

2) UnitedENDA raised a great howl when the Democrats and Republicans gutted ENDA and I'm sure all these groups are against this latest Democratic treachery. But we have top remember this story broke today. UnitedENDA are not the people in our movement who are active shills for Democrats. On the contrary, they’ve promised to fight the twin parties of bigotry until we get what we want. The scale and militancy of UnitedENDA is a refreshing wind blowing over the swamp of Democrat politics.

3) Its outrageous and totally wrong to blame the victims, and absolutely right to blame the bigots. You and Crawford are dead wrong about UnitedENDA. If YOU feel assaulted think how the thousands of activists in the ACLU, GLSEN, NLGTF and 360 odd groups, the crème de la crème of our movement must feel. They didn’t do the dirty deed and you couldn’t pay them too – it was the Democrats and the Republicans, no one else.

Stephen Clark | December 7, 2007 11:11 AM

United ENDA does dserve blame. Far from lobbying in support of the Defense Authorization-Hate Crimes Bill, Matt Foreman, the emperor of United ENDA, has been urging for some time that the Shepard Act be stripped out of the Defense Bill because it was complicated his efforts to lie to rank-and-file gays about the possibility of passing ENDA as a rider on some other piece of must-sign legislation.

bill~Try to meet the request next time. I said to point where I said that the blame is SOLELY, SOLELY, SOLELY, placed on UnitedENDA. That's right, I did not say so.

"1) Its UnitedENDA, the name says it all and reserving the question of single issue focus for later, where was the betrayal? What act of betrayal occurred?"

Read the previous comments, please. I use UnitedENDA as an umbrella term for all those LGBT-supporting organizations. The betrayal lies in the contrast of fervent action on ENDA, while they were nothing but inactive regarding the hate crimes bill. Yes, they may have come together for one purpose, but most of those organizations were previously founded for the purpose of serving LGBT interests in all facets of life.

"2) UnitedENDA raised a great howl when the Democrats and Republicans gutted ENDA and I'm sure all these groups are against this latest Democratic treachery. But we have top remember this story broke today. UnitedENDA are not the people in our movement who are active shills for Democrats. On the contrary, they’ve promised to fight the twin parties of bigotry until we get what we want. The scale and militancy of UnitedENDA is a refreshing wind blowing over the swamp of Democrat politics."

There were warning calls WEEKS before, and most of these organizations did not even bother to mention them in their websites.

"3) Its outrageous and totally wrong to blame the victims, and absolutely right to blame the bigots. You and Crawford are dead wrong about UnitedENDA. If YOU feel assaulted think how the thousands of activists in the ACLU, GLSEN, NLGTF and 360 odd groups, the crème de la crème of our movement must feel. They didn’t do the dirty deed and you couldn’t pay them too – it was the Democrats and the Republicans, no one else."

They were consenting "victims," for they took no action even when warning bells were rung. I agreer with you: They didn't do the dirty deed; what they did, in fact, was nothing, which is just as bad!

bill perdue | December 7, 2007 7:55 PM

When he finally stops his lurch to the right will Stephen Clark be to the right or the left of Attila the Hun. His byzantine explanations of the Democrats long line of betrayals like DOMA, DADT, ENDA and now the hate crimes bill are the standard fare we’ve come to expect from Democratic Party operatives pretending to be part of our movement.

Stephen Clark gleefully supported the Democrats gutting of ENDA. Clark parrots the party line that aims to misdirect anger away from the Democrats betrayals by blaming them on - wait for it, wait for it – yes, you guessed it - UnitedENDA.

Clark is a pitiable reminder of what happens when you start down the brown brick road, you end up in a log cabin. Clark, like the Clintons support the US inspired murder of GLBT folk in Iraq by supporting war funding bills, says; “Far from lobbying in support of the Defense Authorization-Hate Crimes Bill, Matt Foreman, the emperor of United ENDA, has been urging for some time that the Shepard Act be stripped out of the Defense Bill …”

Matt Foreman’s does say “It might be time to pass a stand-alone hate crimes bill and force the president’s hand…” which would also, and more to the point, put the Democrats on the spotlight. Clarks toadying to union busting prowar bigots is an outrage.

However, one of the good results of the shake up and fracturing of US politics is that it will expose right wingers like Clark and force them even further to the right. Historically they usually don’t stop till they’re some where to the right of Mussolini and just to the left of Attila the Hun. We just have to be patient and wait till they get there.

LUCRESE, if ALL you’d said was that the dirty deed was done by Democrats and that people should have learned by now never to trust them I’d agree. But you didn’t. Many people disagreed with you but you reiterated your attempt to deflect blame from the Democrats. Your accusation that UnitedENDA or its constituents were complicit in and helped the betrayal is batty. It’s like your comment a few weeks ago saying that tying the Clintons’ politics together was sexist.

They smugly acknowledge having the same politics and they both lie to protect themselves. Bill Clinton’s on another of his charm offensives and now alleges that he never supported the Iraq oil piracy. Hillary Clinton says her endorsement of an invasion of Iran using nukes is not an endorsement of an invasion of Iran using nukes. If Orwell were alive he be laughing so hard he’d experience a loss of bladder control. Although it’s common knowledge although neither Clinton has expressed outrage over the murder of our brothers and sisters in Iraq, or even commented on it. It’s the oil, stupid.

Both of your contentions, that we were betrayed by anyone but the Democrats and Republicans or that the Clintons, Obama and all the Democrats are not “Team Treachery” are just wrong.