Reply #11: Pam Spaulding confirms story with "three independent sources"

[Prism]

Now, the HRC is trotting out their financially interested defender Robert Raben, but Pam Spaulding today noted that three independent sources confirmed the Advocate's story:

http://pamshouseblend.com/diary/15913/the-advocate-whs-messina-told-hrc-dadt-repeal-in-dod-authorization-was-off-the-table-back-in-feb

And I can say here today on the Blend that I have heard the exact same story about that meeting Kerry has reported on --from three independent sources. As in her case, none are willing to go on the record. Why? I can't speak for the sources, but DC is a company town -- with the industry being politics. I've remarked before that I've never seen so much free leaking in my life -- nothing stays a secret for long, as long as it doesn't go on the record, which could jeopardize professional relationships that are tightly intertwined. It doesn't mean those sources are wrong -- Kerry's article only strengthens the case, and places more heat on HRC regardless of the spin.

The President breaking his promise on DADT repeal -- we know that the dance around defense authorization with Robert Gibbs has been going on for months -- is a bit of a red herring here. Gibbs hasn't answered simple "yes" or "no" questions from Kerry in the press gallery for months, no matter how keenly she's recalibrated the question. The only conclusion one can come to is that the WH is politically afraid to answer directly.

But as you see above, there is this secondary, but no less important story about how our lobbying organization on the Hill conducts its business. One of the core definitions of non-profit institutional rot is when an organization's leadership crosses the line, willing to abandon the core mission in order in favor of sustaining its bloat. This has nothing to do with the hard work of the people doing the work on the ground in good faith, true believers accomplishing work that advances equality goals. That's what makes it so insidious.

Is that what is happening here? There are a lot of questions that need to be answered. Why, for instance, would Joe Solmonese purposely, definitively, go on the road, before cameras, before donors at all levels with their checkbooks out, and say that DADT will be repealed this year? Well, the cash flows in if people sitting at those tables believe HRC has the influence to make it happen then goals of one kind are achieved, but it certainly isn't mission based.

The HRC is going to lie their heads off about all of this, and many people are going to latch onto that to defend the President's mendacity on our issues.

Don't let them.