<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Vanasco: More on NY and gay marriage</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.365gay.com/blog/vanasco-more-on-ny-and-gay-marriage/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.365gay.com/blog/vanasco-more-on-ny-and-gay-marriage/</link>
	<description>The daily news source for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 07:00:40 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Hank</title>
		<link>http://www.365gay.com/blog/vanasco-more-on-ny-and-gay-marriage/comment-page-4/#comment-62523</link>
		<dc:creator>Hank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Jun 2009 16:08:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.365gay.com/?p=7899#comment-62523</guid>
		<description>Tarun: Thank you for making some excellent points about Malcolm Smith and the Republican power grab in Albany. I think you are very correct about the likely downside to having the Republicans bring the marriage equality bill to a vote as a means of forcing the Dems to legitamize their coup. Yes, a defeat for marriage equality in NYS on the heels of the recent victories for it in the Northeastern States, could very well halt its momentum. You are also correct about the supposed &quot;deal&quot; that Smith made with Diaz to stall a vote on marriage equality to avoid his defecting to the Republicans being a red herring because it has not prevented the coup and would not have given the Republicans a majority anyway. What&#039;s happened in Albany is nothing less than a selfish power grab by the loser Repubs and their two Dem henchmen. They have no intention of debating marriage equality or any other issue with their &quot;coalition.&quot; To those who think this was a good move because it could finally result in a vote on marriage equality, I say the ends do not justify the means. I want to see marriage eqaulity debated and hopefully passed in NY, but not at the cost of the Repubs controlling the NYS Senate. Whether or not marriage equality is realized in NY, gays still have to live in this State and are affected by the actions (and antics) of the NYS Senate. The Republicans controlled the NYS Senate for the past 40 years and accomplished nothing in the way of socially progressive legislation. Having them control the Senate again is bad news for all NYers and a death blow to marriage equality! Monserrate, Espada, and Diaz should all be run out of the Senate on a rail by the other Dems; they have betrayed the gay community and all NYers with their selfish behavior, all for the sake of power!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tarun: Thank you for making some excellent points about Malcolm Smith and the Republican power grab in Albany. I think you are very correct about the likely downside to having the Republicans bring the marriage equality bill to a vote as a means of forcing the Dems to legitamize their coup. Yes, a defeat for marriage equality in NYS on the heels of the recent victories for it in the Northeastern States, could very well halt its momentum. You are also correct about the supposed &#8220;deal&#8221; that Smith made with Diaz to stall a vote on marriage equality to avoid his defecting to the Republicans being a red herring because it has not prevented the coup and would not have given the Republicans a majority anyway. What&#8217;s happened in Albany is nothing less than a selfish power grab by the loser Repubs and their two Dem henchmen. They have no intention of debating marriage equality or any other issue with their &#8220;coalition.&#8221; To those who think this was a good move because it could finally result in a vote on marriage equality, I say the ends do not justify the means. I want to see marriage eqaulity debated and hopefully passed in NY, but not at the cost of the Repubs controlling the NYS Senate. Whether or not marriage equality is realized in NY, gays still have to live in this State and are affected by the actions (and antics) of the NYS Senate. The Republicans controlled the NYS Senate for the past 40 years and accomplished nothing in the way of socially progressive legislation. Having them control the Senate again is bad news for all NYers and a death blow to marriage equality! Monserrate, Espada, and Diaz should all be run out of the Senate on a rail by the other Dems; they have betrayed the gay community and all NYers with their selfish behavior, all for the sake of power!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Leslie</title>
		<link>http://www.365gay.com/blog/vanasco-more-on-ny-and-gay-marriage/comment-page-4/#comment-62336</link>
		<dc:creator>Leslie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:11:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.365gay.com/?p=7899#comment-62336</guid>
		<description>Marriage equality is a civil rights issue; it should not be up for debate!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Marriage equality is a civil rights issue; it should not be up for debate!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kari</title>
		<link>http://www.365gay.com/blog/vanasco-more-on-ny-and-gay-marriage/comment-page-4/#comment-62029</link>
		<dc:creator>Kari</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:28:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.365gay.com/?p=7899#comment-62029</guid>
		<description>Steve: That is a legitimate concern... But since parties in the US have less control over their own members than parties on parliamentary systems, it&#039;s not as big of a problem as people would blow it out to be.

In the US you join a party and campaign to get yourself elected. In a parliamentary system you join a party and they campaign to get you elected. It&#039;s a different sort of organization.


That said, tbh, I&#039;m not sure there were enough votes in the Senate to pass the bill *anyway*. Smith obviously was playing politics, but several notable Democrats openly opposed the bill, along with most Republicans.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve: That is a legitimate concern&#8230; But since parties in the US have less control over their own members than parties on parliamentary systems, it&#8217;s not as big of a problem as people would blow it out to be.</p>
<p>In the US you join a party and campaign to get yourself elected. In a parliamentary system you join a party and they campaign to get you elected. It&#8217;s a different sort of organization.</p>
<p>That said, tbh, I&#8217;m not sure there were enough votes in the Senate to pass the bill *anyway*. Smith obviously was playing politics, but several notable Democrats openly opposed the bill, along with most Republicans.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tarun</title>
		<link>http://www.365gay.com/blog/vanasco-more-on-ny-and-gay-marriage/comment-page-4/#comment-61963</link>
		<dc:creator>Tarun</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 06:48:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.365gay.com/?p=7899#comment-61963</guid>
		<description>Steve, Guest, and all: To echo a previous poster, it has been a pleasure to read all your comments. Surely the most insightful &quot;comments&quot; section! But some questions still remain for me:

1. What did Malcom Smith do to be so hated by the &quot;Gang of Four&quot; and how still did he manage to be so despised yet powerful enough to get the Senate Minority leadership (and then the Majority leadership)?

2. How is it not an astute thing to hold from calling for a vote until one can be assured of a bill&#039;s passage? Our fight for equality (as incomplete as it is) is not at the same level where any visibility or discussion was automatically good for us. If Smith brought it to a vote and it failed, would it not be a disincentive for a vote in the near future, even after the 2010 elections? A recent rejection would create the perfect cover for fence-sitters to say there&#039;s no reason to revisit the issue. Further, marriage equality has had such a wonderful string of successes recently that such a significant failure as a legislative failure in NY would rob us of valuable momentum. Your thoughts?

3. Related to this, if indeed Smith made a deal with Rubin Diaz Sr, it would have been, as noted here, under threat of defection for Diaz&#039;s part. How would that have benefited marriage equality? Not only would control of the Senate and all its committees switch to the Republicans, but pro-equality Democrats (including Smith) would have no bargaining power at all. 

4. Last, it&#039;s assumed here that Diaz&#039;s defection alone would have automatically reverted control to the Republicans. But how would they do that being 31-31?  
Looking forward to a continued discussion!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve, Guest, and all: To echo a previous poster, it has been a pleasure to read all your comments. Surely the most insightful &#8220;comments&#8221; section! But some questions still remain for me:</p>
<p>1. What did Malcom Smith do to be so hated by the &#8220;Gang of Four&#8221; and how still did he manage to be so despised yet powerful enough to get the Senate Minority leadership (and then the Majority leadership)?</p>
<p>2. How is it not an astute thing to hold from calling for a vote until one can be assured of a bill&#8217;s passage? Our fight for equality (as incomplete as it is) is not at the same level where any visibility or discussion was automatically good for us. If Smith brought it to a vote and it failed, would it not be a disincentive for a vote in the near future, even after the 2010 elections? A recent rejection would create the perfect cover for fence-sitters to say there&#8217;s no reason to revisit the issue. Further, marriage equality has had such a wonderful string of successes recently that such a significant failure as a legislative failure in NY would rob us of valuable momentum. Your thoughts?</p>
<p>3. Related to this, if indeed Smith made a deal with Rubin Diaz Sr, it would have been, as noted here, under threat of defection for Diaz&#8217;s part. How would that have benefited marriage equality? Not only would control of the Senate and all its committees switch to the Republicans, but pro-equality Democrats (including Smith) would have no bargaining power at all. </p>
<p>4. Last, it&#8217;s assumed here that Diaz&#8217;s defection alone would have automatically reverted control to the Republicans. But how would they do that being 31-31?<br />
Looking forward to a continued discussion!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: porter</title>
		<link>http://www.365gay.com/blog/vanasco-more-on-ny-and-gay-marriage/comment-page-4/#comment-61791</link>
		<dc:creator>porter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 19:56:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.365gay.com/?p=7899#comment-61791</guid>
		<description>they said alot of things but at what cost to the voters would the support of the gay marriage rights bill. their are plenty of republicans who say they support this bill but do they really, or are they feeding you what you want to hear. in order to pickup a few votes next election time. who knows their motives, but to everything their is a cause and effect we must never forget that !!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>they said alot of things but at what cost to the voters would the support of the gay marriage rights bill. their are plenty of republicans who say they support this bill but do they really, or are they feeding you what you want to hear. in order to pickup a few votes next election time. who knows their motives, but to everything their is a cause and effect we must never forget that !!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LOrion</title>
		<link>http://www.365gay.com/blog/vanasco-more-on-ny-and-gay-marriage/comment-page-4/#comment-61764</link>
		<dc:creator>LOrion</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:00:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.365gay.com/?p=7899#comment-61764</guid>
		<description>and from the NY Times ... this marriage report.
Richard Nolan and Robert Pingpank

The Rev. Dr. Richard Thomas Nolan and Robert Charles Pingpank were married Thursday in Hartford.
Dr. Nolan (far left) and Mr. Pingpank, both 72, graduated from Trinity, where they met.
NY TIMES: tinyurl.com/ltys3g</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>and from the NY Times &#8230; this marriage report.<br />
Richard Nolan and Robert Pingpank</p>
<p>The Rev. Dr. Richard Thomas Nolan and Robert Charles Pingpank were married Thursday in Hartford.<br />
Dr. Nolan (far left) and Mr. Pingpank, both 72, graduated from Trinity, where they met.<br />
NY TIMES: tinyurl.com/ltys3g</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve, Albany, NY</title>
		<link>http://www.365gay.com/blog/vanasco-more-on-ny-and-gay-marriage/comment-page-4/#comment-61713</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve, Albany, NY</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:13:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.365gay.com/?p=7899#comment-61713</guid>
		<description>Kari: What about the possibility that some Senate Democrats would change to &quot;no&quot; on the marriage bill because they were only &quot;yes&quot; votes for purposes of party unity?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kari: What about the possibility that some Senate Democrats would change to &#8220;no&#8221; on the marriage bill because they were only &#8220;yes&#8221; votes for purposes of party unity?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve, Albany, NY</title>
		<link>http://www.365gay.com/blog/vanasco-more-on-ny-and-gay-marriage/comment-page-4/#comment-61704</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve, Albany, NY</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:52:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.365gay.com/?p=7899#comment-61704</guid>
		<description>FORMER SENATE GOP LEADER JOE BRUNO ENDORSES SAME-SEX MARRIAGE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-duLYUH7Zs
I knew he had a gay family member, but he has always opposed marriage equality. He could bring some Republican votes with him and give Majority Leader Skelos some political cover in bringing the bill to the floor for a vote. All of this confirms, in my mind, that this switch is a great opening for advocates of marriage equality. If the Democrats won&#039;t bring your bill to the floor, see if the Republicans will!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FORMER SENATE GOP LEADER JOE BRUNO ENDORSES SAME-SEX MARRIAGE<br />
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-duLYUH7Zs" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-duLYUH7Zs</a><br />
I knew he had a gay family member, but he has always opposed marriage equality. He could bring some Republican votes with him and give Majority Leader Skelos some political cover in bringing the bill to the floor for a vote. All of this confirms, in my mind, that this switch is a great opening for advocates of marriage equality. If the Democrats won&#8217;t bring your bill to the floor, see if the Republicans will!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael ONeal</title>
		<link>http://www.365gay.com/blog/vanasco-more-on-ny-and-gay-marriage/comment-page-4/#comment-61692</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael ONeal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 13:41:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.365gay.com/?p=7899#comment-61692</guid>
		<description>It is time to act. Time to do something...just one time. Time to stop paying for the party and then be told to enter by the back door and serve the appetizers and cocktails &quot;and would be a dear little queer and wash the dishes too?&quot;

What an I talking about? You know what I&#039;m talking about. The treatment we receive from our so-called friends in the Democratic Party. I am a life long Democrat. I have worked and voted and voted and worked. All to too little avail. I am 51 years old, a professional and a business owner. Before I die, I want to see my rights and those of younger gays who follow me granted in this  &quot;Land Of the Free&quot; But to get there we will need to also be &quot;Brave&quot; and even more importantly &quot;Smart&quot;.  

Blacks went from having to give up seats to white bus riders to being guaranteed the right to drive the bus in less than a decade. From Selma to civil rights in less than five years. How? They acted as one to demand these things. 

My gay brothers and sisters let&#039;s act as one...just one time. How? Simple. in 2010 give your political contributions, your volunteer hours and your votes to the enemy of our enemy...the Republican Party.

What you say? They are our enemy too&quot; In my view yes they are. That&#039;s not the point. A cohesive demonstration of our collective power once and for all is the point. 

How many democrtic congresses and administrations after that do you think it will take to repeal DADT, DOMA and pass ENDA and Hate Crimes Laws. I say just one more. And all we have to do is leave them &quot;Just One Time&quot; With me? e-mail me at mikethe drugcounselor@yahoo.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is time to act. Time to do something&#8230;just one time. Time to stop paying for the party and then be told to enter by the back door and serve the appetizers and cocktails &#8220;and would be a dear little queer and wash the dishes too?&#8221;</p>
<p>What an I talking about? You know what I&#8217;m talking about. The treatment we receive from our so-called friends in the Democratic Party. I am a life long Democrat. I have worked and voted and voted and worked. All to too little avail. I am 51 years old, a professional and a business owner. Before I die, I want to see my rights and those of younger gays who follow me granted in this  &#8220;Land Of the Free&#8221; But to get there we will need to also be &#8220;Brave&#8221; and even more importantly &#8220;Smart&#8221;.  </p>
<p>Blacks went from having to give up seats to white bus riders to being guaranteed the right to drive the bus in less than a decade. From Selma to civil rights in less than five years. How? They acted as one to demand these things. </p>
<p>My gay brothers and sisters let&#8217;s act as one&#8230;just one time. How? Simple. in 2010 give your political contributions, your volunteer hours and your votes to the enemy of our enemy&#8230;the Republican Party.</p>
<p>What you say? They are our enemy too&#8221; In my view yes they are. That&#8217;s not the point. A cohesive demonstration of our collective power once and for all is the point. </p>
<p>How many democrtic congresses and administrations after that do you think it will take to repeal DADT, DOMA and pass ENDA and Hate Crimes Laws. I say just one more. And all we have to do is leave them &#8220;Just One Time&#8221; With me? e-mail me at mikethe <a href="mailto:drugcounselor@yahoo.com">drugcounselor@yahoo.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kari</title>
		<link>http://www.365gay.com/blog/vanasco-more-on-ny-and-gay-marriage/comment-page-4/#comment-61677</link>
		<dc:creator>Kari</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:42:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.365gay.com/?p=7899#comment-61677</guid>
		<description>Robert, NYC: I doubt the vote would be any different dependong on who is in control of the body.

Peoples&#039; opinions don&#039;t change overnight. The Republicans in the NYS Senate are still the same people they were before Skelos was Majority Leader. If their conscience says vote for equality, they will still vote for equality. And if their conscience says vote for bigotry, they will still vote for bigotry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Robert, NYC: I doubt the vote would be any different dependong on who is in control of the body.</p>
<p>Peoples&#8217; opinions don&#8217;t change overnight. The Republicans in the NYS Senate are still the same people they were before Skelos was Majority Leader. If their conscience says vote for equality, they will still vote for equality. And if their conscience says vote for bigotry, they will still vote for bigotry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
