Gay Patriot Header Image

Solmonese Must Address Evidence HRC is Behind Bogus Blog

Since Joe Solmonese was appointed executive director of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) last year, we have been critical of his selection and of his leadership. He came from EMILY’s List, a partisan Democratic organization. At HRC, he has been quick to criticize the Bush Administration & the GOP and eager to ally himself with left-wing groups*, many of which have partisan Democratic agendae, few of which are active in promoting pro-gay policies.

HRC’s very selection process ensured that the organization’s new leader would be a Democratic partisan. In the aftermath of an election in which approximately one in four gay and lesbian Americans voted to reelect a Republican president, HRC included only one Republican on its 24-member committee to pick its new leader. And that ostensible Republican only gave money to Democratic candidates.

Under Solmonese’s leadership, the group removed the word “bipartisan” from its Mission Statement and removed a press release entitled, “Alito’s Gay Support Raises Hope.” While the release still shows up when one searches HRC’s web-site for Alito, when you click on the title of that press release you get this message: “HTTP/1.1 404 Object Not Found.”

Despite evidence that the President’s then-nominee for the Supreme Court, current Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr, was broad-minded on gay issues, HRC, likely removed its favorable release when they joined a chorus of liberal groups opposing his confirmation. His pro-gay statements and attitudes mattered less to this gay rights’ organization than his conservative judicial philosophy. (I have a copy of the release in my files.)

And now one blogger has uncovered evidence that suggests HRC may be behind a web-site,, that attempted to capitalize on the Foley scandal. On Saturday, reader Brit noted a link in Ace’s blog to a new blog Stop October Surprises which traced the anti-Foley blog to HRC.

Despite Joe Solmonese’s liberal record, there is no evidence linking him to the blog. Still, there is some pretty substantial evidence suggesting that HRC’s employees have been involved in a dirty political campaign designed to hurt the GOP. Many on the gay left are up in arms that closeted gay people are working for conservative Republicans. Now, it seems that some on the gay left are behind a closet attempt to hurt the GOP. And so far, gay organizations have been silent.

As head of HRC, Joe Solmonese must order an immediate investigation to find who was using its ISP on behalf of the bogus blog. If it turns out they were employees of his organization, he must fire them.

HRC has every right to pursue a left-wing agenda. But, it should refrain from such underhanded political tricks. That is why Joe Solmonese needs to address the evidence that someone is using his group’s ISP to set up a bogus blog. He needs to make clear that he disapproves of such underhanded tactics, even when they’re used against his political adversaries.

– B. Daniel Blatt (

* via The Malcontent‘s Robbie.

The Time-Machine Solution

Posted by ColoradoPatriot at 3:53 pm - October 24, 2006.
Filed under: General

A couple times over the past few days I’ve had what seems to be a recurring discussion with many of my contemporaries (the gay ones, not the military ones) about Iraq. The usual dialog goes kind of like this:

The Other Fag: Dude, we’re failing miserably in Iraq.
ColoradoPatriot: Oh? How so?
TOF: Are you kidding? All the bombings, all the death and destruction. The insurgency.
CP: You know that, by historical standards, that’s not really true. And also, when you think about it, the war’s only been going on for a few years. It’s probably a little too soon to say we’re “losing”, don’t you think? So if we’re failing, what’s your definition of “victory”?
TOF: Well, we should never have gone in there in the first place. WMD, bla bla bla, Bush LIED!, 9/11, yadda yadda, scare-tactics, etc., etc.
CP: (Silence, and a look of puzzlement.)

What’s going on in my head as I stare blankly is, “If you think we should have never gone there in the first place, why the hell should I give a rat’s ass what you think of our ‘victory’ or ‘failure’? Seems you’d never be satisfied with any outcome, you know, since we’re, um, there and all.”

These folks have no solution for “winning” the war, because their vision of “winning” is so drastically different from reality. As far as they’re concerned, simply our being there is a failure. From their perspective, there can be no winning because their view of victory (us never having been there) is simply unattainable. I call these people Time-Machine Strategists. Their best hope for success in Iraq (as they see it) is to invent a time-machine, go back to 2003, and never have gone in in the first place. This is not a strategy, it’s a science-fiction novel premise. Whatever we may see as victory, they never will.

It’s not that, as some say, they’re seeking our defeat. It’s just that they have a completely different definition of success…one that just so happens to be completely impossible.

We can talk about schools being built and people going to work and hundreds of newspapers and internet cafes. We can talk about progress with infrastructure, politics, and self-policing. All of this falls on deaf ears.

It reminds me of my new favorite online cartoon: “How Superman Should Have Ended“…Basking in the glow of his most recent victory over Lex Luthor, the Man of Steel is chatting it up with his buddy Batman in a coffeeshop. The Caped Crusader is going on about how he‘d have handled the situation, using tools on his ubiquitous utility belt. Not even realizing how outdone he is by Superman, he lays out how he’d have done it just as well. Annoyed, Kal-El quips back, “It’s cool…just, whenever you get a Fly-So-Fast-It-Reverses-Time-Itself gadget on your belt, let me know.”

Not sure if the detractors have anything on their belt to succeed in Iraq. But based on the way they like to frame the debate, I’d just as soon leave it to those who take actually winning in Iraq seriously…criticize their plans all you like (and there certainly is room for criticism); at least they know that they want to win.

-Nick (ColoradoPatriot)