Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  priorities

Is HRC Bailing on Gay Veterans to Host a Fancy Board Member Reception?

The often irascible relationship between Servicemembers United (Alexander Nicholson’s anti-DADT group) and the Human Rights Campaign (which underwrites some of SU’s projects, particularly when the gay blogs start complaining about HRC’s ineffectiveness) just grew larger: HRC has reportedly walked out on its agreement to pay for a chartered bus that would bring some 50 gay veterans to D.C. as part of Veterans Lobby Day, where dozens of these folks will take part in meetings with the White House and Pentagon. Instead, the funds will be used for “a previously unscheduled reception for its board and steering committee members.” We’d bother writing more copy after this, but the lack of surprise doesn’t deserve it. What is surprising, however, is the leak out of Servicemembers United to Americablog, given so much of SU’s budget is at the mercy of HRC.

Update: Responds HRC’s Michael Cole via email: “HRC is proud to have contributed significant resources to Veterans Lobby Day including direct costs and significant staff time. Last night the question of paying for a bus came up but contrary to reports, the matter wasn’t resolved at that time. We will be paying for bus transportation as we have paid for nearly the entire cost of the event. Never was there a question of prioritizing a reception over transportation.”

By:           Arthur Dunlop
On:           May 5, 2010
Tagged: , , , , , , ,

  • 26 Comments
    • Cam
      Cam

      How can you bail on people you never gave a shit about in the first place? Unless Soldiers are wearing tuxedos, have pockets full of cash and the phone number of some c-list celeb HRC wouldn’t care about them anymore than they care about any other gays. Their supposed job is to push for gay rights, but with two major gay rights pushes going on on Cap Hill right now their leader decided to fly off to England, and now their boardmembers want to throw themselves a big party rather than bringing in gay vets to help influence Congress on DADT.

      Remember, if we get our rights, HRC loses their jobs.

      May 5, 2010 at 12:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jason
      Jason

      Oh, why not.

      There is no money in ACTUALLY working for equality.

      There is, however, TONS of money in hosting parties and raising money!

      Natch!

      May 5, 2010 at 12:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mike L.
      Mike L.

      Way to go HRC, way to piss on our veterans for the sake of not making the Obama administration upset.

      This sort of sabotage by the Obama administration via HRC to stall anything having to do with the reppeal of DADT is disgusting.

      And while my statements above are mearly speculation on my part, I don’t think it’s far of to think that that is what happened. At least I wouldn’t be surprised if some sort of leak from HRC would reveal as such.

      May 5, 2010 at 12:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)
      DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)

      Hate to say it, but this is why I have such a difficult time supporting Servicemembers United. I wish SU would move away from its affiliation with the HRC to avoid precisely this kind of nonsense. I wonder what the press release from SU will say about this?

      May 5, 2010 at 1:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SSCHIEFRSHA
      SSCHIEFRSHA

      It’s what a $100,000+ salary for managing a CHARITY organization. buys you. Shame on them…truly.

      May 5, 2010 at 1:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chasing Tail
      Chasing Tail

      Anonymous source, no attempt to contact HRC.

      Lets keep going at each other.

      May 5, 2010 at 1:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      No. 6 · Chasing Tail
      Anonymous source, no attempt to contact HRC.

      Lets keep going at each other.
      _____________________________________

      If this wasn’t true, it would be in SU’s interest to quickly come out and say it isn’t true. It would also be in HRC’s best interest to do that….funny how neither has happened.

      May 5, 2010 at 1:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MikeSLC
      MikeSLC

      The behavior being exhibited by the HRC is absolutely disgusting. Their reputation in the LGBT community is so horrid, that when I read the headline I didn’t even question myself whether the headline was true or false.

      This is not the first time some of us in the community have been thrown under the bus so those over at the HRC can maintain their power and lifestyle. I wonder when we come together and say enough is enough.

      May 5, 2010 at 1:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DEREK WASHINGTON
      DEREK WASHINGTON

      I have been trying for twenty minutes to get an answer out of HRC and can only get voicemails even after pretending to be a Federal Club member.

      Honestly, I can’t believe this is true. I mean, they must have a PR dept..

      Right?

      May 5, 2010 at 1:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • wondermann
      wondermann

      So this was a rumor. Funny, how folks jumped to the conclusion it was HRC’s fault. Sad

      May 5, 2010 at 1:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)
      DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)

      @wondermann:

      HRC claims it’s a rumor. There’s a difference. Wonder what SU has to say?

      May 5, 2010 at 1:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MikeSLC
      MikeSLC

      Whether it was true or not, gotta give it up their reputation is so bad people had to jump to conclusions. Jumping to conclusions about the HRC has served me well, my assumptions are usually correct.

      May 5, 2010 at 1:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • emb
      emb

      I have to agree with MikeSLC: Whether or not this is a “rumor” is now officially not the point. The fact that the story is so easily believed speaks volumes about HRC’s evolution into a irrelevance–and I’m not for a moment deciding that it’s not actually true; read the statement carefully: “the question of paying for a bus came up but contrary to reports, the matter wasn’t resolved at that time” is easily construed as spin-speak for “We kinda grimaced and said, ‘I’m not sure about that’ when they started talking about a bus, but we didn’t have the balls to actually say No at the time, planning to let it fade away later.”

      May 5, 2010 at 2:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      Notice what HRC is now saying….

      “Last night the question of paying for a bus came up but contrary to reports, the matter wasn’t resolved at that time.

      We will be paying for bus transportation as we have paid for nearly the entire cost of the event. Never was there a question of prioritizing a reception over transportation.”
      _______________________________

      Why wasn’t the question resolved at that time? If they are supposedly paying for this entire event, and remember their budget breaks down to somewhere around 45-50 million dollars a year, why wouldn’t they agree to pay for one bus which would go for a few hundred dollars and support an event that they are supposedly paying for? Everybody know that “Not resolved at the time” means “We said no.”

      And why did they suddenly decide today to pay for a bus when last night they hadn’t? Gee, could the report on the blogs have had anything to do with that?

      May 5, 2010 at 2:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chasing Tail
      Chasing Tail

      HRC is irrelevant to bloggers. It’s not irrelevant to the groups in the states that they assist with funds and staff. It’s not irrelevant to the volunteers who are working in many states on ENDA, DOMA and DADT. It’s not irrelevant to it’s active members.

      May 5, 2010 at 2:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chasing Tail
      Chasing Tail

      @Cam: They never said they were paying for the entire event. Not once. This is a shared venture between many organizations.

      May 5, 2010 at 2:59 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      No. 16 · Chasing Tail said….
      @Cam: They never said they were paying for the entire event. Not once. This is a shared venture between many organizations.
      ___________________

      You should try reading their press release…espeically the sentance that says, “We will be paying for bus transportation as we have paid for nearly the entire cost of the event.”

      And could they SOUND more bitter with that senatnce, what they need to realize is that THEY aren’t paying for shit, their donors are the ones paying for it. That money isn’t THEIRS it is on loan from the gay community that seems to think they will use it to do good things.

      May 5, 2010 at 5:02 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • WalkderDC
      WalkderDC

      I have gotten to the point sad to say where I really just don’t think that HRC really cares about the best interests of gay people. I really believe that they are only concerned about their own jobs, their own parties, and their own wants and needs, and will only act in a way beneficial to us if forced to by bad publicity or to try to kiss up to some minor celebrity. It is horrible to think this and I hate that they have acted in such a way over the past few years to make me so cynical but there you have it.

      May 5, 2010 at 10:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AndrewW
      AndrewW

      HRC is interested in fundraising, not our equality.

      May 5, 2010 at 11:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sacgary
      Sacgary

      @Cam:

      I have been saying this exact thing for 2 years.

      It is refreshing to find I am not the only one.

      May 6, 2010 at 12:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • james
      james

      I bet anything this was Joe’s decision, maybe he had to entertain his new bf

      May 6, 2010 at 7:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      The reason HRC is so screwed up is the role they play as a front group for Democrats.

      They long ago decided to staff their organization with Democrats, to be the unwelcome and intrusive voice of the White House in the internal affairs of the LGBT movement and to run interference for Obama and Congressional Democrats.

      In 2007 when the Democrats gutted ENDA and made it a Republican friendly bill HRC supported them. That was the same year that Pelosi and Reid quietly dropped the hate crimes bill after it’d passed both houses. They didn’t want people to get the impression that Democrats supported GLBT equality, not that there was ever much danger of that happening.

      In California in 2008 when Obama went on the christer bigotfest circuit and MTV to denounce same sex marriage because ‘gawd’s in the mix’ HRC and their partners in crime at EQCA never lifted a finger to correct Obama’s egregious bigotry.

      By trying to work within the Democrat Party HRC became a sock puppet for Obama, Quisling Frank, Reid and Pelosi.

      May 6, 2010 at 7:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ousslander
      ousslander

      HRC Bad. Now to go slightly off subject. This comment rating systems is ridiculous. There was nothing wrong or offensive with what wonderman and chasing tail said. Whats offensive is people who diagree with what they said trying to shut them out and make the conversation one sided.

      Have great day off to work!

      May 6, 2010 at 8:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DEREK WASHINGTON
      DEREK WASHINGTON

      @NO.23: I have been railing on it for days now! It’s stupid and reeks of censorship. I’d rather be exposed to things I don’t like than be a Teabagger hidden away from opposing thoughts.

      May 6, 2010 at 2:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tom in Lazybrook
      Tom in Lazybrook

      HRC is run by their board members for their board members. In January 2009, the HRC treasurer publically stated that DADT repeal wasn’t a priority for them.

      I don’t understand why anyone thinks that they do anything for the LGBT community.

      May 6, 2010 at 10:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AlbinaBladina
      AlbinaBladina

      ??????_???????????? ??????: ???????????? ????, ????????, ?? ???????????????? ??????, ???????????, ?????????? ????, ????????????? ?????? , ??????????? ??????
      ???????? ????,??????? ???????? ?????, ???????? ??????????
      ?\? ????: ?????? ?????????, ?????, ?????????
      ?????????: ???????? ?????, ??????? ????? ??????, ?????? ???????? ????, ??????? ????

      Jul 7, 2010 at 6:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.