Posts
From Pride at Work's email:
House Democratic Leaders Back Off On Plan to Cut Gender Identity Out of ENDA, Pride at Work Holds Off on Demonstration
House Democratic leaders decided on Monday, October 1st, to delay a scheduled committee meeting on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) where a new version of the bill that would eliminate protections for transgender people was going to be substituted for the original, fully inclusive bill. The House leaders said they were postponing the meeting in order to give the LGBT community more time to line up support for the original bill, HR 2015.
Pride at Work welcomed the postponement, and called off plans to picket the Speaker of the House, Representative Nancy Pelosi, at the Human Rights Campaign's national dinner in Washington, DC on Saturday, Oct. 6. Speaker Pelosi, who along with Representative Barney Frank, the prime sponsor of ENDA, had announced plans last week to cut gender identity from the bill, was to be the keynote speaker at the HRC gala.
"We're glad that Congressional leaders have recognized that the LGBT community will not stand for any attempt to leave any part of our community behind," said T Santora, Pride At Work Co-President. "We're confident that we can overcome any obstacles to a fully inclusive employment discrimination bill, and we stand ready to call a demonstration again if any further effort is made to divide our community. Unity and solidarity are essential."
Pride at Work, the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender constituency group of the American labor movement, has organized impressive labor support for ENDA, with an unprecendented 24 International Unions and labor organizations among the 60 national allied groups that have endorsed the bill. "We thank our unions brothers and sisters, from the United Steelworkers, to the Service Employees International Union, to the AFL-CIO for speaking out and demanding an inclusive ENDA. We know the power of working people speaking up for justice," said Nancy Wohlforth, Pride At Work Co-President. "We will never sit idly by and watch one part of our community abandoned for political expediency. If our elected officials and leaders try this tactic again, they can expect to see Pride At Work members in the streets wherever they go."
It is good to know that a lot of people are making a lot of noise. But, don't trust Pelosi and Frank.
Contact Pelosi's Office Now!
Did you see Autumn Sadeen's post on ENDA worse then we thought on the Blend and also at her blog Transadvocate.com...there is a lot of stuff in it..that allows discrim based on appearence, percieved gender ID ..and that affects us all - well it all effects us all,but there is more ...it has some stuff in it on health benefits for domestic partners..I believe the title is ENDA worse than thought.
HRC panics they want our money. They are a PAC right ? Yet they support the status quo - dems. WE need to rethink who is really a friend of our community - the fact they needed a letter..shows their true colors..shame on them - power corrupted i suspect..
Speaker Botox sold the LGBT community down the river.
Just as she sold the liberal, antiwar community down the river by insisting "impeachment is off the table," followeed by "Bush isn't worth impeaching."
Speaker Botox keeps hiding behind the cunnard of, "there aren't enough votes to cut-off funding for the Iraq war." So, sh'e reduced to "praying President Bush won't veto SCHIPP."
Pelosi is a far more successful Pacific Heights socialite than she is leader of the Democratic party. She would do herself a favor by handing that damned Gavel over to someone with balls, who isn't afraid to go mano-e-mano with Bush.
Speaker Botox is such a disappointment.
Pride at Work's accomplishment is very impressive. Even though the meeting is only put off "for now," oftentimes that means "never." I hope the original version will prevail.
"Speaker Botox." Love it. :)
Candance you make a good point..and given clintons track record..they talk real pretty but the shit that went down under the last clinton administration - did the LGBT people no favors..nope and we were promised the world..It seems to me job one is anybody..but Hillary. If this country ends up with a dynasty of BCBC i will just be sick..i mean really ill. I will not vote for her. My eithics forbid "collusion" and that vote would be a vote for murder. Kucinich, Richardson the only non war mongers in the race. And i do not really trust Richardson...I just dug deeper and spoke to a campaign manager at Kucinich headquaters to make suggestions about improving their web site and asked if Kucinich would consider running Independent. He was really open. I also bought a sweatshirt and a mug..this was my second donation...I am hoping for a miracle..If we all dig really deep we might get one ..you never know.He is the only real friend of humanity on panel. Obama..i go back and fourth on..honestly because i do think , he would be a dramatic change..BUT he is already shown his lack of yrs of experience..that is troubling..as Washington is such a corrupting place. But right now its anybody but Hilary ...she would sell us out faster than her husband did.
Grrrr.... Writing my letter now.
Just FYI, I sent HRC's email to my Congresswoman, Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Tx) and she wrote back saying that she was one of the co-authors of the original bill - yay!
I really like Obama. Please do take the time to read his book, The Audacity of Hope. It shows how he has looked into the issues in depth. He is no political lightweight! As to experience, remember, he also had eight years' experience in the Illinois State Senate before coming to Washington. Obama would be an outstanding president, IMO.
I don't understand the "anybody but Hillary" thing. IMO, she'd be an okay president. (Jeebus, how bad could she BE after Dumbya?) Besides, it would be a hoot to see Bill as the First Lady. :) He's such a ham, you know he'd love it. He could best serve by traveling around the globe repairing the damage the Bush administration has done to our foreign relations.
Anybody but a Republican is the main thing, though. I can't vote for them until they rid themselves of the control the "religious right" has on their party.
candace: Here are some postings on this blog which explain some of the reasons why many people will not vote for Ms. Clinton in 2008 in the primary, or in the general election, if she gets that far.
The LOGO and the Human Rights Campaign Foundation Candidate Talk Show, Part 1: Clinton Lied About “Don't Ask, Don't Tell”
http://godlessliberalhomo.blogspot.com/2007/08/logo-and-human-rights-campaign.html
Ask Hillary Clinton to Return the Dirty Fox Money
http://godlessliberalhomo.blogspot.com/2007/08/ask-hillary-clinton-to-return-dirty-fox.html
Some of the Similarities Between Hillary Clinton and George W. Bush
http://godlessliberalhomo.blogspot.com/2007/07/some-of-similarities-between-hillary.html
Media Matters Endorses Dynasty Over Democracy
http://godlessliberalhomo.blogspot.com/2007/06/media-matters-endorses-dynasty-over.html
Hillary Clinton Was on Wal-Mart's Board of Directors for Six Years
http://godlessliberalhomo.blogspot.com/2007/01/hillary-clinton-was-on-wal-marts-board.html
Crap, blogger chopped up the URLs.
Just search "Clinton" for postings on her.
sigh
I'll try the "search blog" feature, too - later, though - thanks very much!
Hey there,
I've read all your posts about Sen. Clinton (using the "blog search" window, then clicking on your "Hillary Clinton" label.)
I'm not overtly pro-Clinton (I support Sen. Obama), but I will still vote for her if she's the party's nominee. Once again, for me, the election comes down to one thing: electability over the Republican candidate. I hate having to choose between the lesser of two evils; however, voting for a third-party candidate in the current two-party system when the stakes are so high would really bother my conscience.
It would be great if Obama becomes the frontrunner, but if he's the Veep nominee, I'll be happy.
Okay, on Sen. Clinton and the issues:
I'm extremely disappointed in her AND the others, including Obama, who said they couldn't guarantee full troop withdrawal before 2013. WTF do they think we would put them in office for?
I don't believe that DADT was purposely designed to increase discrimination, so I disagree with you on that. I am appalled to learn, however, that increased discrimination has been the result. I attribute that more to the implementation by the homophobic top brass in the military than to the policy itself. It looks to me like the brass used the policy to continue the witch hunt, going with the "letter" of the law but against the "spirit" of the law. I always thought it was a stupid policy, but had no idea that it had been used to discriminate even more against gays. Israel's military has openly gay members and it just doesn't seem to be an issue over there. The Clinton administration had the opportunity to start the same thing here, but they blew it.
Once again, Sen. Clinton disappoints me in her support of NAFTA. That "giant sucking sound" Perot spoke about is very loud here in Texas.
Thanks for the mini-education re: Hillary Clinton, Libhom! But, I haven't seen anything that is a deal-breaker for me. Like I said, I will still vote for her IF she's the Democratic nominee because I don't want to do anything that would help get another Republican in the Whitehouse. At least, not until the Repos get rid of their evangelical leadership.
Speaking of which, the Fundies are saying that if Guilliani gets the nomination, they'll sit the election out. Go Guilliani!
Queer veterans groups were warning that the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" version of the ban would result in more witchhunts and more discharges before that version was passed into law.
One of the ways it was done was to give unit commanders absolute latitude in deciding what constitutes evidence of homosexuality, which is the trigger for a witch hunt.
Back when I lived in DC, the military was sending spies into gay bars to find queer troops and kick them out. This was completely consistent with the wording and intent of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."
The homo-hating Clintons have been lying about "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" the same way they lied and said that NAFTA would mean more American jobs, not fewer.