Comments on: Senate Majority Leader Reid announces support for National Equality March

By: Gerry Fisher

Gerry Fisher — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 17:44:00 +0000

>Democrats love to sweet talk, but don’t deliver.

FWIW, some deliver. Governor Patrick of MA said he’d defeat efforts to overturn marriage in this state, he (and the senate and house leaders) worked like dogs, and they got it done.

When state politicians have pulled through for us, it has almost always been done by Democrats. They ain’t perfect, but the other side is *much* worse on our issues.

By: Gerry Fisher

Gerry Fisher — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 17:39:36 +0000

Nice symbolic support.

Now, to quote Lady Goo Goo or whatever her name is: Get off your a** and get ENDA and expanded hate crimes legislation passed by the end of the year.

I’d rather have results than your “endorsement” of a march.

By: Kari

Kari — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 02:52:13 +0000

Trace: Since clearly passing the Matthew Shepard Act is ‘nothing’ to you… what in god’s name would you define as ‘something’?

By: Brian O'Reilly

Brian O'Reilly — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 01:10:01 +0000

Democrats love to sweet talk, but don’t deliver. DADT and DOMA will still be there one year from now at the time of the midterm elections, because democrats have no balls. I am staying home.

By: Trace Eggers

Trace Eggers — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 23:59:48 +0000

“As Senate Majority Leader, I will continue to work tirelessly to pass the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Act and the Employee Non-Discrimination Act, as well as to repeal the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy.”

Tirelessly? Certainly he must be talking to individuals that do not realize that Washington has done nothing.

By: Dermot

Dermot — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:38:43 +0000

If Harry Reid does support gay rights, he may be the highest-profile Mormon to do so. I still miss Governor Huntsman even though he was a Republican…he was so kind and generous to us, even at the cost of his own reputation in his party.

By: fwilms

fwilms — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:27:09 +0000

I don’t care what the Dems support as a group. That’s irrelevant. Senator Reid is the leader. If he is in favor of full equality, it’s his job to encourage the rest of the Senate Dems to also support full equality–not to wait for everyone of them to get on the bus. End DOMA!

By: randy

randy — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:10:42 +0000

This is a nice letter, and might be a first from a Senate majority leader, and those changes in it must happen. But this march is about full equality, not piecemeal.

By: Wayne M.

Wayne M. — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:40:20 +0000

It is important that LGBT people make their voices heard loud and clear if they expect to gain action from legislators on our issues. I am pleased to see the Senate Majority Leader say he will act on key issues in our community. A strong action by our community will make sure it happens. Failure to act on our part to support our demands only strengthens our opponents.

By: Kari

Kari — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 19:34:28 +0000

DaveW: You are correct in saying that the Dems in the Senate are not collectively in favor of marriage equality (though there are several who would support repealing DOMA). But I’d charge you to name a Republican in the Senate right now that has gone on the record saying that he or she would support the repeal of DOMA.

And thus we have the crux of the problem: There’s no Republicans who would support repealing DOMA, and among the Democrats it’s a very divided house.

Even if the issue of a Republican filibuster was not in the way, there probably aren’t even 51 Democrats in the Senate who would vote to repeal DOMA.

As for our President, he has said many times that be believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman. That said, he has consistently opposed attempts to amend the US Constitution to define marriage in that way, and has indicated that if the Respect for Marriage Act (which would repeal DOMA) were to pass Congress he would sign it.

Also, I’m a bit confused about your comment regarding “regressive taxation and redistribution of wealth”. When people talk about redistributing wealth, they are generally referring about redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor. Regressive taxation is defined as taxation where the poor pay a larger portion of their income than the rich.

Unless you’re talking about redistributing wealth from the poor to the rich, reducing both regressive taxation and redistributing wealth at the same time isn’t a rational approach.

Can you please clarify?