More on Cho controversy
a) BuzzFlash Article
This is from the introduction of a great interview with Cho about the
debacle, published today in Buzzflash:
“We had interviewed Margaret recently, for a second time, about her new
“State of Emergency tour http://www.margaretcho.com/tour” and her new
DVD, “Revolution
http://www.buzzflash.com/premiums/04/06/pre04021.html,” when news
broke about the Kerry campaign apparently asking the Human Rights
Campaign to nix her appearance, out of fear that it would allow the
Republicans to throw the first night of the convention off message –
and stir up the mainstream press into a sensationalistic frenzy. After
all, all journalism now is tabloid journalism — and Karl Rove probably
would have gotten a couple of days of FOX News and CNN outrage out of it
to be sure, not to mention blaring headlines on the /New York Post/.
Here’s the whole article:
http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/04/07/int04038.html
b) posting from DontAmend.com
——– Original Message ——–
Subject: [lgbt-politics] Did the Kerry Campaign order HRC to drop
comedienne Margaret Cho?
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 00:14:31 EDT
From: ATDontAmend@aol.com
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Entertainers at “Unity 2004″ asked not to cross picket line.
On Friday the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) “disinvited” one of the
biggest entertainment draws in the Lesbian and Gay community, comedienne
Margaret Cho. Cho was to have been the headline act for a Monday, July
26th reception for Democratic Party convention delegates hosted by the
HRC and nine other Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered organizations.
Did HRC nix Cho because her brilliant comedy was going to attack the
present administration? Or, did HRC nix Cho when it feared that the
Bush campaign might make hay off of some of her more ribald jokes? Did
HRC fear that Democrats would be embarrassed by a comedienne, who may
have used the same words that the Vice President of the United States
said (F-you) on the floor of the Senate? At least Cho would confine
such language to a 21+ nightclub, whereas Cheney poisoned the minds of
impressionable, C-SPAN-watching youngsters.
So did HRC allow the predominantly straight Kerry campaign team to
dictate to them who would perform at a gay event? Or, did HRC just not
care about the first amendment and freedom of speech? What an insult to
this great entertainer. And, what an insult to the organizations who
were not asked what they thought of disinviting Cho.
Yes, in its undignified scramble to probably appease the Kerry
moralists, HRC apparently didn’t even have the decency to consult with
some of their LGBT cohosts in the event. Placating the Kerry
campaign was more important than even going through the motions of
working with others in our community. As a result, when they got news
of HRC’s unilateral decision, the National Gay and Lesbian Task force
bolted from the event.
It is precisely the HRC’s attitude towards the Democratic leadership
that has led to their impotence in national politics. As the great
abolitionist activist Frederick Douglass once said, “Power concedes
nothing without a demand. Never has. Never will.” Most national gay
organizations haven’t made any demands of the Kerry campaign and, as a
result are served crow at every turn.
During the “gays in the military” debate at the start of the Clinton
administration, the leading LGBT organizations advised their followers
to not criticize the President, even when it became clear that he was
about to break his promise to our community. The result was that all
the pressure on Clinton was coming from the right, with no at least
countervailing blast from our community. The result was one of the most
humiliating routes of Clinton’s first administration, and a defeat for
our community.
Many would reply that any criticism of Kerry just plays into the hands
of the Bush campaign. A look at history shows how utterly false this
notion is. For example, to its credit, the abolitionist movement
conducted a withering campaign of criticism about Abraham Lincoln –
even in the midst of full-scale war — and arguably played a key role in
moving him in a progressive direction.
Last week, some 27 Democratic Congressmen crossed the aisle to support
the anti-gay “Marriage Protection Act,” thus providing anti-gay
Republicans with the necessary margin of victory for this legislation
that would ban LGBT access to the court system to challenge the 1996
“Defense of Marriage Act.” If we are to move politics in a pro-gay
direction, we need to be unsparing in our criticism of politicians who
oppose us, regardless of party affiliation.
Unfortunately, today most gay organizations are downplaying Kerry’s
opposition to equal marriage rights, and his pledge to support an
anti-gay constitutional amendment for the state of Massachusetts. The
latter move, led by a “who’s who” of Democratic Massachusetts State
legislators could, as early as 2006, destroy equal marriage rights in
the one state where we’ve won them. By muting their opposition to
Kerry’s attacks on our rights, they are repeating the sorry history
which gave us Clinton’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and many more anti-gay
purges following the implementation of that policy.
Some of us won’t let history repeat itself, and won’t keep silent this
time. That is why DontAmend.com will be picketing the gay Dems’ confab
at 8:30 PM, Monday, July 26 at the Avalon Nightclub, 15 Lansdowne
Street, Boston. We would hope that entertainers will not cross this
picket line, but join us, in support of Margaret Cho.
We hope you will join us!
DontAmend.com
For info, email ATDontAmend@aol.com
