The House Passes The Employment Non-Discrimination Act
By Logan Murphy Wednesday Nov 07, 2007 4:29pm
Via The Gavel:
Rep. Frank: “I want to address the motion to delay. Mr. Speaker, we say here that we don't take things personally, and usually that’s true. Members, Mr. Speaker, will have to forgive me — I take it personally. 35 years ago, I filed a bill that tried to get rid of discrimination based on sexual orientation. As we sit here today, there are millions of Americans in states where this is not the law. By the way, 19 states have such a law. In no case has it led to that decision. The Massachusetts law passed in 1989, that did not lead to the decision in 2004, unrelated. But here’s the deal: I used to be someone subject to this prejudice. And through luck, circumstance, I got to be a big shot. I’m now above that prejudice. But I feel an obligation, to 15-year-olds dreading to go to school because of the torments, to people they’ll lose their job in a gas station if someone finds out who they love. I feel an obligation to use the status I have been lucky enough to get, to help them. And I want to ask my colleagues here, Mr. Speaker, on a personal basis, please don’t fall for this sham. Don’t send me out of here having failed to help those people.”
This is an encouraging sign and something I hope we see a lot more of from our representatives in the future. Discrimination is wrong, period. White House staffers reportedly had their hands in the bill, assisting with language dealing with religious exemptions; what does that mean for President Bush? Will he veto the bill? Think Progress has more.
Login or Register to post comments.
Yes. Bush will veto the bill.
I love how he never takes crap from anyone. Some should feed off of that.
Right on! Keep it up, Barney!!!
another bosh veto coming right up!
Man I love Barney. Well, you know what I mean...I mean I love him but I don't man love him, but I love ...oh screw it, I love him.
One of the three decent, honest people in Congress.
Outstanding. Barney Frank is so antithetical to any stereotype it makes my eyes water. Powerful, powerful statement.
Oh! and BRAVO FOR BARNIE!
Just reading Rep. Frank's statement gave me a lump in my throat. We've got a long way to go, but we sure have made it a long way.
Barney Frank smacking down Republicans on this issue recently on Real Time with Bill Maher:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=OSDQQtHKakU
Huh? What year is this 1918?
Never Mind
but I do have to disagree with one thing he said: "I’m now above that prejudice." I so wish this was true, but the fact is that he will never be above it...as long as hate groups try to take away his rights, and the rights of all my gay and lesbian friends, to love who they love!
Moose @ 10:
Sorry, did I say recently? I meant a year ago.
Now we need to get the T back in the bill!!! Why must we be left out?
An elected politician who is actually working for the people. What a hell of a nice example to set for the rest of the slugs in congress.
If bush does veto it, hopefully they will do what they did with the water projects this morning and override it. They should get their override votes ready to go now every time bush picks up his veto pen.
Franks deserves emails of gratitude.
You tell 'em Gwen. No one's free unless we are all free.
seagull.girl @ 12:
There's always going to be haters in this society looking to beat up on people for one reason or another and finding ways to do it.
The USA isn't Utopia
If only we could hear such speaches more often, and not only in Congress...
L.A. Confidential @ 17:
I think all he meant was that he was 'protected'. He's not going to lose his minimum wage job b/c his boss and co-workers are homophobic.
Now they need to talk about what they are going to do to get people employment in the Bush Banana Republic.
Good ole Barney...he may not be prettiest guy in Congress, but he's certainly one of the most intelligent, sharp witted and eloquent speakers to ever grace its halls! There aren't many Bible thumpers in the House--nor, I dare say, the Senate--that would want to take him on in a debate, because they know he would make them look like fools and quickly reveal them as the assholes they are!
Moose @ 13:
time flies in a dicktatership.
Mr. Frank has beeen "Representing" for 26 years! I remember when his name was a running joke. Now he is arguably the last honest man in Washington.
Keep up your great important work.
No lump in THIS throat
Barney Franks is one of those great people who doesn't take any shit from anyone. He's confident of himself and comfortable in his own skin. Ya gotta love the guy.
L.A. Confidential @ 11:
No..It's 1984
Oops, subtract that "s" from his last name in my previous post. I guess I made it plural because I wish there were more just like him. :)
Fanon @ 19:
Maybe so. I suppose it all comes down to what kind of behavior a "boss" (hate that word) writes into his company policy. If there is stuff like "no sex is permitted with other employees during work hours and on premises" it wouldn't matter what your preference if you were caught.
Spock @ 26:
I know, it's like Civil Rights is a new thing.
Sheesh
L.A. Confidential @ 28:
Yes, you're right. I was just trying to point out what I though he meant by "above the prejudice". You know, being openly gay and in a position of power and respect.
What exactly is a 'religious exemption' when it comes to discrimination? Could someone explain that further?
pissed off patricia @ 27:
OK! and please accept my correction of his first name: BARNEY!
Between us we botched the whole name. :)
I like Barney Frank, always have.
This performance is embarrassing, for God's sake. Far below his usual standard.
MargeAggedon @ 31:
ask any Catholic Priest or Reverend Haggart :lol:
MargeAggedon @ 31:
You know, I was thinking about that. The only thing I can think of that they could do is to allow churches decide not to hire you if you are gay. I know that Catholic Charities was just sued and lost because it was deemed they were not a church and could not discriminate in that way
L.A. Confidential @ 29:
That is what's so pathetic about it. Some asshole is trying to use procedure to protect discrimination. It make me even more proud of Barney.
Sadly, though, the amendment protecting transgendered people from discrimination was not passed.
BaScOmBe @ 32:
Frankie Barnes? Great guy! I useta bowl with'm!
'No discrimination against others', unless you're a 'Child of God', a 'Follower of Jaysus', a 'Disciple of Dobson', a 'Reverant of Robertson', a 'Fakir for Falwell' in which case you can be as loony-tunes, amoral, flat-out crazy as you can imagine.
wobbly @ 33:
No, what's embarrassing is that it's 2007 and someone's still got to stand up in the house and explain to Republicans that discrimination is wrong. And if you think this was below his standard, you probably didn't stick around to end of the clip to hear the raucous applause of those in attendance who felt otherwise.
but churches can still discriminate right??!?!? please someone tell me that churches can still discriminate!!!
(and still be tax exempt too, right? right?!?!?)
*paces nervously*
Ben @ 2:
When you get treated as second rate your whole life, you have a very short fuse for (other people's) CRAP. I was almost fired from one of my jobs, explcitly for my sexual orientation. I went on to become one of the most valued employees, and office manager. (I left that job years ago.)
Fanon @ 35:
The exemptions listed for organizations like private religious schools, who are even exempt from the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
The law usually does take into account the nature of a business before subjecting it to anti-discrimination laws. Indeed, even in any lawsuit that might arise under ENDA, "business necessity" will be an invocable defense.
Of course bush will veto the bill. Anything that helps the little person, even in small ways, is EVIL in his rotten book.
This is great news. Now all the toe tapping gay Republican men can come out of the toilet stall.
Rep. Baldwin, withdrawing her “T” (transsexual and gender identity) inclusion amendment to yesterday's successful Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) passage:
Rep. Baldwin: “But while I believe that a roll call vote on this amendment would demonstrate strong support for an inclusive ENDA, I believe that it will fall short of adoption.
“People have asked why I pressed for and insisted upon bringing an amendment to the floor and maintaining the option to withdraw it without a vote. The reason is simple. I believe that those who will be left behind by this bill deserve to hear on this House floor that you are not forgotten, and our job will not be finished until you, too, share fully in the American dream.
“So at the moment at which the closing arguments are made, I will withdraw this amendment. With a commitment to my colleagues and all Americans committed to equality of opportunity, and ending discrimination, that I will do everything within my power to make this measure whole again.”
Take half a loaf, come back for more.
Bush vetoing this bill? Let him. We'll force the Republicans to talk about their need for bigotry all year long.
Coffins draped in flags @ 45:
What the Harry was I writing?
Now all the gay Republicans can come out of the bathroom stalls and stop their toe tapping.
kudos to everyone like John from americablog who helped this to happen
right from the hip, baby. right from the heart.
The homophobes can say what they want, but once again Barney kicks ass on the floor.
Good for Frank, but...
I dunno. Call me a pessimist but I'll get excited if it passes Senate and Veto. If you haven't noticed those two have been just a wee bit of a stumbling block lately. Otherwise all you have is a fractured activist community because they were forced to drop the Ts for any possible chance of passing, yet it doesn't get passed anyway. Everyone looses, and the Republicans gloat.
I'm guessing they won't even bother to bring it to a vote in the Senate for another year. It's not like it would pass them or Emperor Bush anyway.
Yet another good step those I support, but... honestly still a log way to go for any meaningful change there.
"a log way"? Heh.
"a long way to go" obviously...
I hear you and am with you Gwen... But I still thinks its a damned shame the TG community got dumped on in this bill to begin with... I have mixed feelings about Frank. I know he's done some good things but... And a good friend of mine who happens to be TG says he's always been this way.. I.E. not too interested in the TG community... I don't know what that's about...not really... I'm not buying the expediency argument trumping honest defense of the whole group. There has been way too much chucking of honor for the sake of expediency for way too long already....
I hate saying it, but it almost seems like within the LGBT community, it's still ok to pick on, or in this case, leave behind the t part of that larger community... What is up with that??.. I don't get it... Even though I have witnessed what I can only describe as some kind of intracommunity discrimination type behavior myself as regards how the various sub interest groups interact... I hope that the TG community gets some kind of fair shake going forward and sooner rather than later.. Everyone deserves equal rights and equal protections....
Well, except maybe the neocons but that's a whole different can of worms...JD
swarmofkillermonkeys @ 51 "Call me a pessimist but I'll get excited if it passes Senate and Veto."
You are a pessimist. This bill has been introduced in every Congress for something like 20 years or more. This is the first Congress which passed it. Will it automatically become law? No, but it is another hurdle crossed.
"Otherwise all you have is a fractured activist community because they were forced to drop the Ts for any possible chance of passing, yet it doesn't get passed anyway. Everyone looses, and the Republicans gloat."
That's certainly the most negative view of it you can take. With 'half a loaf' there are always those who say it's not enough.
"I'm guessing they won't even bother to bring it to a vote in the Senate for another year."
Kennedy will introduce the bill soon, and I think it will get a vote fairly quickly (it will lose).
It will be vetoed. In 2009 it will pass and be signed, though still without the T (I imagine). But the courts may well include T in even if Congress does not.
Paul in LA @ 54:
I agree with you. Getting it in a year or two is better than not getting equality for my fellow Americans at all.
But I think it is important for those in the community to acknowledge that the T dropping will be quickly and thoroughly exploited by the Republicans to wedge the community (as if they care). Divide and conquer still works pretty well, as we've seen. But push-pull is the only way either group will get recognition, and somebody's gonna have to go up the ladder first.
Of course it is! Gotta think like a Republican to beat 'em... think like the most cynical, self-hating opportunist and presto! That is Republican strategy gold. Sure worked for me in prediction Rove's and Cheney's behavior anyway.
But I'm worried that the community will loose some momentum guilt-tripping themselves about the T issue. As if they have a choice. You don't bake a cake by just throwing all the ingredients in an oven and praying. You gotta go through the steps. Life sucks.
Of course, I guess I don't have anything personally at risk here (besides respect for my government and safety for my friends), so I'll admit to being a loud-mouth armchair quarterback... ;)
It's hard to imagine a more pyrrhic "victory" for Barney Frank, HRC, and the Congressional Democrats than this futile piece of flawed legislation. Its craven compromises epitomize the many broken promises of the pseudo-Democratic Party and the straight-laced Washington Beltway lobbyists who dominate the Homosexual Rights Campaign. Absolutely no one predicts it will pass the Senate or survive a Bush veto. What ENDA actually marks is a watershed moment - the end of Barney Frank's credibility as Congressional leader of the LGBT movement and the public exposure of the HRC's betrayal of trans and gender variant people. Nothing they say will ever be trusted again.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
See what I mean above? Exactly... play into the hands of the Repubs... you make the Dark Lord Cheney smile, my friend... parody or no.
Now if we can just add racial discrimination back on the agenda, we may be making some headway.
I know we people just need to get over it.
"Play into the hands of the Repubs"? You must be referring to the sterling example set by Barney Frank himself in a rousing speech in support of ENDA to his Republicrat collegues:
"Now, this is the issue: Does a political party say to its most militant, committed, ideologically driven believers in purity that they have a veto over what the party does? ...let me talk about this ideological faction that we [Democrats] have...
But here are some of the characteristics: first of all, they tend to talk excessively to each other. One of the things when you are in this body is you talk to people all over the country. You talk to Members of Congress from every State. And I have this with people who can't understand why I am not introducing legislation to impeach the President and the Vice President, and I find that this is a characteristic that these are people who do not know what the majority thinks, who do not understand the depths of disagreement with their positions on some issues. And that doesn't mean a majority that says George Bush is wonderful. That isn't there anymore, but a majority who would be skeptical of impeachment.
But let me get back to this. There are people who talk excessively to each other..."
And no, Barney Frank was not referring to Beltway insiders as "people who talk excessively to each other", it's us unwashed bloggers who are the source of his contempt. In his world, it's the back-room power brokers who issue the veto from above, not the people his pseudo-Democratic Party supposedly represent.
This bill is watered down and does nothing to protect gays. It did nothing but divide a community. This bill is a failure. Nice way to show that it is ok to throw Transgender people out. This bill isn't a civil rights bill it is just a me me me bill. Barney Frank is transphobic and a horrible man for what he did to Transgender people. HRC is also horrible it will cost the Dems on this one and the Community as a whole is set back. Transgender people will not work with gays anymore we do not trust them. We also do not trust the back stabbing Democrats who promised to include us then at the last minute threw us out. The bill is a shame. History repeated itself and the only thing history has showed when that happens is NOTHING WILL HAPPEN WITH THIS BILL.
Barney Frank can blow me. I'm pretty sure that if it were gay men, and not transsexual and transgender people, who were being left behind by this bill, he'd have had a lot more to say about it. So, great, here's a bill that, if it even passes the Senate, will be vetoed, so basically all it's done is say, "Good luck, trannies! Thanks for Stonewall and everything! Good luck with your jobs!"
Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere, Mr. Frank. You should be ashamed of yourself.
What if we passed race-based civil rights legislation with the same kind of caveats? "OK, Native Americans, Latinos, folks of Asian ancestry: you guys are in. Black folks, well, what can we say. People hate you too much and you're really bogging us down. We've got to cut you loose. Better luck next time."
60 & 61, gee, I wonder how many people are GLB versus how many are T? Got any idea?
ACS gives the number 1.3 million for GLB in California, 8.8 million in the U.S. That would be about 4%.
Those numbers are no doubt low, but as a baseline that's a LOT of people who would receive significant employment discrimination protection under this bill.
How many T?
1 per 20,000 is a tiny fraction of 1% (50 per million, or a presumed national population of 15,000).
So in your opinion, the needs of 15,000 persons equals the needs of 8.8 million persons.
When the full ENDA finally goes through, that will be a beautiful day. But today is not that day. As you note, this ENDA won't fully pass, but yesterday it passed the House for the first time after decades of efforts.
Taking that accomplishment, small though it is, away from GLB would hurt T as well, in case you don't understand the concept of progressive change (as opposed to all your rights, right now, which in Perfect World you would have already).
Pout, or work for change. Freaking out that change is at whatever level gradual remains the perennial tension between radicals and those who take half a loaf and come back for more.
Lish @ 56:
And? Maybe you are too young to remember that blacks got NO racial discrimination legislation for 80 years after the Civil War.
This passed the House, after considerable effort. That's an accomplishment.
But in Perfect World where the radicals live, they just sit on their cans and the rights are delivered by the wheelbarrow full. You don't have to march, you don't have to organize, and YOU DON'T HAVE TO SUPPORT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES -- you know, the ones who even give a shit about your rights.
Clearly you don't know what century this is. You've never heard of REPUBLICANS. I recommend you look at the floor number when you get out of the elevator next time. You are not in the penthouse.
You're down with the rest of us, in the Mezannine between no rights and everything we deserve.
Shoot John Aravosis and Barney Frank in the foot. Oh wait, that's YOUR foot.
Sure, I've heard of Republicans, they are outright enemies of LGBT folks everywhere. But it was not the Republicans who gutted ENDA, it was a cabal of Congressional Democrats, the same group of quisling sell-outs responsible for capitulating on Iraq, FISA, Telecom immunity, Mukasey, impeachment, ad nauseum. ENDA is yet another example of how Congressional Democrats work behind the scenes to betray us, they are NOT our "representatives", they are just as much our opponents as are the Republicans.
Your misleading estimates assume that only transgender people were short-changed by ENDA. What you are perhaps too nostalgic to have noticed is that non-traditional gender identities and expression have become widespread among the younger generations of queer lesbian, gay, and bisexual folks as well. ENDA's ban against discrimination based solely on sexual orientation falls far short of protecting butch dykes and femme gay men who are more often targeted for visibly gender variant appearance and behavior.
BTW, your man John Aravosis outed his own transphobic bigotry quite tellingly during the course of this debacle. You might want to think twice about whose ex-Republican feet you choose to fall in line with.
Lish @ 64:
actually, paul, i think the rights of any one person are as important as the rights of any other. i didn't realize that we weighed people's entitlement to civil rights based on critical mass.
what would you say trans people count as? like, 3/5 of a person, or less?
it's easy to talk about half a loaf when you aren't the one going hungry.
Paul in LA @ 65:
"That's hilarious. You pretend to having no idea how Congress functions."
I take it you're implying that Frank and Pelosi worked in collusion with Republicans in a back room deal to gut ENDA as a joint exercise in top-down bipartisanship? Then we agree on the Vichy Democrats' role as patronizing enablers of Republican intransigence. They are the apologetic "liberals" whose thankless job it is to deliver the sorry excuses for the latest Congressional capitulation.
I'm sure the Republicans were happy to help the Congressional Democrats drive a divisive wedge into the heart of the LGBT coalition. There's nothing Republicans love better than to watch the Democratic leadership publicly betray their hardcore base. Particularly in this case, where nothing of legal consequence was at stake, with a bill that no one need worry about its chances of actually getting passed into binding law.
What you don't seem to understand is that there is a realpolitik reason why we pile on the Democrats when they blatantly short-change us. It's important they understand just how much pain they will bring on themselves when they cross us. If we treated them the same way they indulge the Reps, the Dems would be encouraged to see how much more they could get away with the next time. If we silently acquiesed to this gratuitous insult, they'd have no reason to ever take us seriously again.
way to go, gays! I mean transphobes! Frank is openly contemptuous of transpeople, as demonstrated by his comments about 'penises in women's showers'. So is John, failed politician and openly trans misogynistic (see his Salon article). So are many others.
The gays don't give a Dam* who they hurt to get theirs- as long as their trans. Gays openly display bigotry even as they clamor for special rights at other's expense.
Now there's a national precedent for transhate. People will find it easier to hate us, now that the gays have shown their true selves.
Paul in LA @ 62:
Many places have protections against gay discrimination already. Far fewer have protections against Transgender discrimination. Without jobs, we can't exist. Is it too much to ask, for a group that is discriminated against more harshly than homosexuals, that we can keep our jobs? Could the gay community stand up and say, "Hey, they need help too?"
Gay activists run around and lobby for marriage rights. All I want when I transition is that my boss has to come up with something more original than "Tranny" to use as my reason for dismissal.
Sarah @ 69 "Many places have protections against gay discrimination already. Far fewer have protections against Transgender discrimination."
That's true. It's an issue about which a great deal more work is going to be needed.
"Without jobs, we can't exist."
That's also true. It doesn't change the fact that the bill with a 'T' provision would not have passed the House. Do you really support not passing what we could get? If the GLB part goes through and becomes law, it is not so hard to imagine that a court will extend the bill to cover T as well. Or in a year or two, conditions in the Congress may allow for the complete bill.
But until that time, the bastards in Congress who blame GLBT for Nine-eleven still have votes, and they don't vote for your rights, I'm sorry to say.
s. @ 66:
How much work have you done for Native Americans? They are per capita the poorest people in America, and they get VERY little in the way of gov't services, very little in the way of anti-discrimination help, very little in the way of hospitals and health care. Then again, they don't have jobs because there is no work on the Res.
So don't give me this shit about 'everyone deserves their rights.' Of course they do. But getting them, that's the hard part.
lyssa @ 68:
It is HIGHLY unlikely that 'people' even know the ENDA passed the House. Most people have ZERO information on which to base an uptick in 'transhate.' You can count the number of people in any city who know who Barney Franks or John Aravosis are on your hands.
You ought to check out the intra-ethnic conflicts among African-Americans, for instance. ANY culture has a variation in acceptance, and certainly subcultures (so-called) have a spectrum of opinions to contend with.
Expanding the Hate Crimes Act would be a good next step.
Here is a list of who is on your side re: REAL hate, and, "shockingly," it also includes Barney Frank:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR01592:@@@P
Paul in LA @ 70:
When Bush vetoes the bill anyway, will it be worth ignoring us?
Paul:
I was referring to legislators in states where transpeople were fighting bigots and gays in states where we don't have protections yet. They WILL be aware of federal legislative efforts, including this most recent Congressional transbashing.
Youe point about African Americans is irrelevant. What is your point?
Here is a list of who is on your side re: REAL hate, and, “shockingly,” it also includes Barney Frank:
Frank was the person who dumped trans protections. He has spoken out against transpeople on numerous occasions. He has terminated friendships with lesbians who transitioned. He is rude to transpeople in private. He has publically stated that transpeople do not belong in the GLB rights movement.
He is iconic of gay "support" of transpeople.
OK, the militant-Ts have won me over...
The bill should include Ts. And actually, why not just make one big bill for the whole year's legislation?
Really, just put it all in one giant bill. Because all of the constituents are equal right? Wouldn't want to "leave anybody behind" or anything.
Of course there is no way in hell anything like that would EVER get passed so we'd achieve our goal of sniffling in our hankey's and enjoying a nice rousing chorus of "Oh! Woe is ME!" rather than getting what we need in sequential order.
That is a great plan.
Whatever... this community lost the minute they started bitching about the order of the letters (which STILL goes on mind you) rather than what everyone else does (alphabetically): BGLT. When you get a culture that APPEARS would rather argue than win, you will loose allies and fast.
Is it just me or does Bush really want to go down as one of the worst presidents ever? Iraq, letting bin Laden escape (priority), SCHIP veto, the national debt crisis, election fraud, Katrina issues, tax cuts for the rich, cutting veterans benefits, unemployment... hot damn adding a civil rights step back to the list... I doubt he'll ever be listed as the worst ever, but a blow job doesn't seem all that terrible does it?
I am disappointed that transgenders aren't on there, but you have to take it one step at a time. Its been over 30 years since the idea was hatched after Stonewall, progressivism times gets shorter and shorter.
The bigoted, impotent Dick-Head Reslugs love and stand for discrimination.
Ginger Lee @ 76:
Transgender people started stonewall. We started much more too. The gay groups have always pushed us out using this excuse. This crap is nothing new it is a repeat of history with what happen in new york and other states when gays like Barney Frank are given power and HRC to stop transgender people from achieving anything on the hill. We were told the same tired old excuses as well. That's why we are pissed off and why to heck with anything else we aren't buying the same old fish oil that the gay community keeps trying to sell us. There is a long history of Barney Frank being Transphobic and the Transphobia came out at Americablog in full. Gays are no less full of being a-holes then any other group.
Sarah @ 73 "When Bush vetoes the bill anyway, will it be worth ignoring us?"
You were not ignored. After a veto the project of writing these rights into federal law will continue, as it has now for twenty plus years.
lyssa @ 74 "I was referring to legislators in states where transpeople were fighting bigots and gays in states where we don't have protections yet. They WILL be aware of federal legislative efforts, including this most recent Congressional transbashing."
You weren't bashed, either. You are simply not in this version of the bill. Your claim that passing GLB in the House didn't improve your situation is strained. OF COURSE IT DID. The whole issue moved forward.
"Youe point about African Americans is irrelevant. What is your point?"
My point is that getting rights written into Federal law is not a direct process, because you have major opposition from the very same kinds of people who upheld segregation for eighty years (mostly in the Senate). Since you are a tiny minority instead of a large one, that has an impact (I was talking about statistical differences), but even if there were tens of millions of you, the process would still have to get past those same, mostly Southern, opponents of your progress.
If you want to ignore the opposition, then you can claim you were left out. In fact, you went forward, and they are not happy about it.
"Frank was the person who dumped trans protections."
That's incorrect. Your supporter Rep. Baldwin, filed an amendment, and then withdrew it, SPECIFICALLY in order to symbolically include you in the bill.
"He has spoken out against transpeople on numerous occasions."
And yet he supports adding T to the Hate Crimes bill, which would be a big accomplishment. You will not be invited to his dinner parties, and so what.
Login or Register to post comments.