should the Human Rights Campaign regret endorsing Hillary?

[Pat Riots]

a jury just killed a post this morning which I think was attempting to ask this question, which is a good one. the other post went with a rather unfortunate metaphor, and perhaps was hurt by the fact that Human Rights Campaign has same initials as hillary Rodham Clinton...

so, here is a thread without the metaphor. The HRC should not have endorsed HIllary, or anyone else, imho. it hurts a movement to get involved in prinary battles between allies. i know i was pissed at PP for putting money behind ad buys for Hillary...not what I give them money for, and I will have to consider that next time they ask me for money....but, i am not really a memeber of the GLBT community and am interested in what others think....what do you think?

[Pat Riots]

1. also, this is my first post here at DU

i self deported from DKos.......

[JTFrog]

24. Mhmm.

[NurseJackie]

38. We think alike ...

and

[monicaangela]

2. YES

Welcome to DU!

[Pat Riots]

3. thanks!

[DURHAM D]

4. No.

I have been a contributing member to the Human Rights Campaign from day one. Sometimes they have done things that pissed me off but endorsing Hillary Clinton (or Bill Clinton in 1992) is not one of them.

I find the sudden interest in the HRC from those who don't have any skin in the game very interesting.

[Pat Riots]

13. my interest isnt sudden

as I have several friends living HIV+, and one I lost to AIDS back in the late 80s. not sure if that counts as skin in the game to you or not.

[Punkingal]

14. People can care about how people are treated even if they aren't LBGT...

Same goes for caring about POC issues. But we are repeatedly told not to comment or have opinions because we have "no skin in the game." I have difficulty understanding that attitude.

I care...should I stop? Is that what it means?

[Onlooker]

5. No more so than a black group should regret endorsing Bernie for his stereotyping ghetto remark n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

35. Of course your OP making that accusation got demolished so badly you never managed to comment

in support of your own assertions. I even commented on the fact that you posted and scampered off in silence.
Here is that thread so everyone can read it, it is very through and as you know, Bernie was quoting an African American voter he had spoken to. You know that, but you say this anyway which is just not honest. It's despicable.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511475551

[Onlooker]

39. Actually, I didn't scamper off in silence ...

... it was a gorgeous day in Cambridge, MA so spent the day outside.

And, no, Sanders was not quoting someone from BLM. The person from BLM never said anything about being white, and Sanders never credited that person with his comments, so your point about Sanders plagiarizing is wrong, too.

Here's what Sanders said, "So to answer your question, I would say, and I think it’s similar to what the secretary said, when you’re white, you don’t know what it’s like to be living in a ghetto. You don’t know what it’s like to be poor."

The version being shared by many Sanders supporters conveniently leaves out some of what he said, to make it sound like he was quoting the BLM person, but this is the complete text with what is left out in bold that makes it clear Sanders controversial remarks were his own, not a quote:

Tell you another story, I was with young people active in the Black Lives Matter movement. A young lady comes up to me and she says, you don’t understand what police do in certain black communities. You don’t understand the degree to which we are terrorized, and I’m not just talking about the horrible shootings that we have seen, which have got to end and we’ve got to hold police officers accountable, I’m just talking about every day activities where police officers are bullying people.

So to answer your question, I would say, and I think it’s similar to what the secretary said, when you’re white, you don’t know what it’s like to be living in a ghetto. You don’t know what it’s like to be poor. You don’t know what it’s like to be hassled when you walk down the street or you get dragged out of a car.

[SamKnause]

36. That was not a remark from Bernie.

It was a quote from a female BLM activist.

Carry on.

[Onlooker]

40. You're wrong.

The Sanders supporters are editing out part of what Sanders said to make the controversial remarks appear like a quote. My post just above shows the full quote, unedited.

[Number23]

41. I'm glad you figured out what these folks are trying to do. With one side of their mouth they scream

about Hillary's lies and with the other, they deliberately distort what Sanders said during the debate in order to try to make him look better.

I've been in your other thread trying posting the same thing you just said here. No way in hell it was just an unintended oversight that the "So to answer your question, I WOULD SAY" bit of that quote was repeatedly left off. No way in hell.

[Kip Humphrey]

6. It is a matter of access: Hilary keeps a list, Bernie doesn't. Plus, Bernie provides no QPQ.

So, don't go too hard on our progressive friends. It is the way of corrupt politics. They WILL come around to Bernie's camp eventually.

[m-lekktor]

7. they already gave their tepid/generic criticism of Hillary and returned to their cocktail party.

As a gay man, I could care less who they do or do not endorse, they are far removed from my life and anything I care about. They can get married and join the marines now, their job is done.

[ibegurpard]

9. seconded

[Agschmid]

8. No.

[ejbr]

10. This is hyperbole, but

I think they know how Log Cabin republicans feel when supporting their own level of bigotry for "greater" good. i am not going to go so far as saying Hillary is anywhere near as vile as repigs when it comes to equal rights, but does anyone believe Bernie was unaware of or would forget about the Reagans legacy on AIDS? And now they might understand our concern for that endorsement.

[Betty Karlson]

11. Tying themselves to Clinton's 20th century mentality

(the kind that thinks the Reagans were benign to the gays) is likely to make the HRC very irrelevant very soon.

When kissing an ass, one should make sure that

a) the ass is acceptably clean (no sh*t coming out at inopportune moments)
b) the ass should be comfortable with gay affections (not kick you down after you kiss it)

I think we can safely conclude (especially when taking into account the eagerness with which the Hillary Hide Patrol tries to shoot down this question every time it is asked) that the HRC made a serious error of judgement when they decided to kiss the ass of Hillary Clinton.

It's this kind of ass that leaves the kisser with a foul taste in the mouth.

But then, who am I to judge? As a gay man, I don't condemn other people's fetishes. Masochism is a thing.

[Pat Riots]

15. hi. hope you dont mind me running with this topic

i thought it was important.

[Betty Karlson]

16. On the contrary, I appreciate it!

[Pat Riots]

19. i am new here

so i dont know what is the correct protocol....

[Betty Karlson]

20. I'm afraid there is a bit of a war going on at the moment.

Sorry that should be your first impression of the site.

No need to wave white flags at me, though. The only white flag I want to see is one on top of Clinton's HQ.

[Pat Riots]

21. its ok

i was at DKos for many years, so I am used to the sharp elbows, especially around primaries.

just dont want to piss people off about etiquette

[Betty Karlson]

23. Being pissed off is all the Clinton Camp has right now.

Their little bit of site has banned a whopping 675 members so far from participating in their discussions. Don't mistake their long toes for site etiquette.

[bigwillq]

12. No, but they should take back the endorsement

And not endorse anyone until the GE, which they probably should have done in the first place.

[Docreed2003]

17. Considering there is evidence of individuals being paid for endorsements...

I have to wonder if money was a factor in the early endorsement of Sec Clinton. Endorsing during a primary is rare as hens teeth, why the need to endorse so early??

[Pat Riots]

18. yeah

i tend to think if both primary candidates are reasonable to your mission, and the other party is very unacceptable, a movement might be better off NOT endorsing. better yet, endorse both over the alternatives.

i suspect this comes down to access and insider politics.

which points to another reason to delay an endorsement: HRC, PP, and many elected officials in the Democratic Party seem to have been unaware of the actual mood of the country. this appears to be a year when uniting early behind an establishment insider is exactly the wrong move, but they all jumped first without listening....that is what elections should be. a conversation in which the voters get the last word.

[Zorra]

22. Yes, and I emailed them told them how and why it was wrong a month ago. nt

[MisterP]

25. they didn't think they should endorse her even as they endorsed her!

Clinton 89%, Sanders 100%
https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/41q7bf/human_rights_campaign_rates_hillary_clinton_at_89/

[Laughing Mirror]

33. All the proof you need about their integrity

Because otherwise, such an endorsement would defy logic.

[daleanime]

26. No....

[artyteacher]

27. no. eom

[Metric System]

28. This gay man stands with both HRCs.

[revbones]

29. They should have regretted it a long time ago

But then, it was just their exec board that opted to endorse here and HRC is pretty much part of the establishment these days.

Edited to add "HRC" in that case was the Human Rights Campaign. Otherwise, the line is fictitious because Hillary has always been part of the establishment...

[Laughing Mirror]

30. HRC & HRC both belong to the exact same elite

Upper-class straights, upper-class gays colluding and enjoying one another's exclusive company, playing the pay-to-play political game they play so well. I, a gay person, not of their class or even their race, am not interested in playing their game. Not that they would want me to play anyway.

[Motown_Johnny]

31. Everyone who endorsed her should regret it.

She is a terrible candidate.

[Vote2016]

32. Definitely!

[DemocraticWing]

34. I'm gay and nearly everybody I know disdains the Human Rights Campaign.

They don't represent poor people, people of color, or trans people very well.

They can endorse whoever they want, and it won't matter.

[Bluenorthwest]

37. I was done with HRC long ago, when they betrayed the transgender community who are my friends and

indivisible from our lager community. It is an old white boys club, not equitable to women, trans persons, nor to people of color. It has it's place in the big money establishment but their primary endorsement is going to prove to be yet another problem for them to contend with as they fade away as an important advocacy group.
From the Advocate last year:

A new internal diversity report reveals the Human Rights Campaign has a sexist work environment where only 'gay, white, male' employees advance into leadership positions.

http://www.advocate.com/human-rights-campaign-hrc/2015/06/04/5-most-disappointing-things-we-learned-about-hrcs-white-mens-cl