Why establishment endorsements mean nothing

[Prism]

Just a quick hit. I noticed in the town hall, Clinton was asked about her previous opposition to gay marriage. She claimed she evolved *eye roll* and that she's 100% behind us now *eye roll*

But what was interesting was her "evidence". She made sure she got in that the Human Rights Campaign endorsed her.

I won't get into it yet again for straight people. The LGBT community and the HRC are not synonymous things. Haven't been for a long, long time.

But the fact, rather than explain herself, Secretary Clinton just leaned back into the HRC endorsement as proof of . . . god knows what.

That's where the filthy lucre is. They endorsed, she claimed that spot safe, and everyone's happy.

Well, not everyone. Certainly not vast swaths of the LGBT community the mainly white, male, and affluent HRC does a shit job of representing.

But it was an interesting little exchange. Their endorsement is proof that her railing against my family for years out of political expedience was okedoke.

And that is why I have no use for her or the HRC.

[enigmatic]

1. "Evolving" Evolved"

The one thing that always strikes me whenever I hear those words in relation to anything, let along in regards to human rights is that (at least in Hillary's case) I never hear the reasons or the "why" they evolved.

[Prism]

3. THAT is what I wanted

I wanted reasons. Why were my rights unspeakable until they weren't? What was your reasoning?

And she didn't give it. Even when invited to. She just lazily went, "Well, HRC is ok, so . . ."

They let her off the hook. Fuck them.

[Merryland]

5. yeah - like how she evolved from being a Goldwater Girl

to being...whatever she became.

[m-lekktor]

4. yup HRC can have the HRC

Ironic the initials are the same! Can't stand either one.

[Prism]

6. It's almost weirdly perfect

And perfectly stupid.