Open Letter to Arianna Huffington: "Queer Voices" Has Got to Go

Ms. Huffington:

In recent days, The Huffington Post has unceremoniously re-branded its LGBT news section, "Queer Voices." Its previous name, Gay Voices was deemed to be too exclusionary, as not everyone under the sexual minorities umbrella considers themselves to be gay.

Yes, ma'am, I'm talking to you.

The problem is, "Queer" as a word carries a lot of baggage, most of it quite negative. To many--and I'm one of them--it's plainly offensive, particularly if used by others to define me. If a person wants to identify as "queer?" Knock themselves out. Don't assign it to me. If a gay organization or publication wants to use the word or a "Q" or a variant (such as Queerty)? It doesn't bother me. It's from the community, for the community. There is no hint of malice. But when it's a section of what is essentially an online mainstream newspaper? No. No.

I understand the impulse to change the name, and it is doubtless true that you've probably received criticism from trans people, bisexual people and anyone else who doesn't identify primarily as "gay." I also understand that coming up with a short, succinct heading is quite difficult, because by its nature, a short name has a difficult job being inclusionary. Somebody is bound to be left out of a lot of the options out there.

My own gay section doesn't try to solve the riddle, since it's
just little old me here. I'm not LGBT, I'm just "G."

This is borne out by the history of the most common identifier of LGBT. We've gone from "Gay" to "Gay & Lesbian," to "Gay, Lesbian & Bisexual," to "GLBT," (which is pronounceable as glibbit, and includes trans-, whether transsexual or transvestite), to LGBT (ladies first, but unpronounceable). That pretty much stuck, but it started to gather barnacles of other letters and symbols, because it still didn't include everybody. And though that seems only natural, it also starts getting unwieldy, and begging your pardon, quite ridiculous.

The entire point of an abbreviation is that it be shorter, and succinct. LGBTTQQF*GPBDS? doesn't do that. And, invariably, it's still going to leave somebody out. So, I can appreciate HuffPo's dilemma. "Gay" doesn't cut it, what are the succinct alternatives?

- LGBT Voices, probably nixed for the reasons listed above
- Pride Voices, reasonable, inoffensive, probably in use somewhere else
- Lambda Voices, probably too obscure
- Rainbow Voices, probably too vague
- Alternative Lifestyles, nearly as bad as Queer Voices for a lot of reasons

So, again, I understand your dilemma. I happen to think you blew it, royally. You'd have done better by inventing a word, and sub-titling it with a description. You could've done something plain like, "Huffington Post Pride Page," or something more vague like, "Our World: Huffington Post's LGBTetc. Pride Page." Ultimately, it's not up to me. That's why you, Ms. Huffington make the big bucks. But changing "Gay" to "Queer" to be more inclusive and less divisive utterly misses the mark.

I wrote this as an open letter for the simple reason that this little dark corner of the internet was inspired by The Huffington Post, though my sights weren't nearly as lofty (thank goodness). Along with John Aravosis' AmericaBlog, I decided to start my own blog because of HuffPo some nine years ago. I've continued to read it daily, and have used it many times as a source for articles and links. I haven't loved everything, and am utterly lost as to why your entertainment writers are seemingly obsessed with the Kardashians to the point of absurdity. But I've always felt included in the Gay Voices section. Queer Voices doesn't feel remotely as welcoming.

Sincerely,

James L. Greenlee, Editor
Greenlee Gazette

SNL: "Arianna Huffington" on Weekend Update

Nasim Pedrad may just be the new Kristen Wiig!

Over Time with Bill Maher, August 24, 2012

Ep. 256: August 24, 2012 - Overtime

Obama: Thought Romney Meant it When He Said He Wouldn't Get Bin Laden

Politics leads to plenty of WTF moments, but I was actually kind of dumbfounded when I heard Ed Gillespie (professional GOP election guru) whining about President Obama's ad touting the killing of Osama bin Laden, and pointing out that a President Romney may not have even tried to do such a thing. It's sourced, I remember the source. . .so what's the problem? Gillespie portrayed it as unseemly and out of bounds. Even the allegedly liberal Arianna Huffington called it "despicable."  [Story continues below]



What? Why? Are we to believe that with an opposite set of circumstances, Republicans wouldn't touch it? That they can't/haven't/wouldn't tout anti-terrorism operations in an election? That they wouldn't imply that Democrats might do a worse job? Which issue is the despicable one, the "grandstanding" or the Romney slam?

Image found at Common Dreams.

See, I remember seven stinkin' years of Republican grandstanding and/or fear-mongering using terror, terrorism and terrorists as subjects. I remember a flight-suited Dubya landing on an aircraft carrier, artfully staged to look as though it was going out to sea. There was color coordination, pomp and circumstance, and a big, red-white-and-blue banner reading "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!"  They even made a stinking (doll) action figure out of it! And yet, the mission wasn't even accomplished. Boy, now that was some freakin' grandstanding.

And they say the left has a woody for Obama.
Explain this! Image from Balloon Juice.

I also remember Darth Dick Cheney flat out saying that if John Kerry were elected, we were going to get attacked again! Now that is freakin' dispicable! So, tell me again--especially you, Arianna--WTF is wrong with the ad. But before you do, tell me honestly. . .if George W. Bush had killed Bin Laden, do you think he'd have been quiet and reserved about it? Really?


[Excerpt]

Obama Defends Attack On Romney: ‘I Assumed’ He Meant It When He Said He Wouldn’t Get Bin Laden


Mitt Romney and his allies have been attacking President Obama for his campaign’s recent video ad, highlighting both his decision to order the raid that killed Osama bin Laden and Romney’s statement in 2007 that he would not have taken similar action given the chance. Romney now says he would have done the same as Obama. “Of course [I would have]. Even Jimmy Carter would have given that order,” Romney said today. . .

Read more at: Think Progress

AOL Highlights End of DADT With Sexy Photo?

Yeah, I still use AOL, both for mail and for browsing. I don't care to go into why, I just do, okay? Anyway, since Arianna Huffington's Huffington Post squerged with AOL, there is a lot more "front page" content highlighted, with today's top stories easy to get to, and encapsulated. Not surprisingly, on Tuesday, the welcome screen's #1 story was the repeal of the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. But Arianna, please tell me why the story used a super-sexy photo of two guys smooching? REALLY?!?

 

Arianna Huffington: Huffington Post Not a "Lefty" Site

Image from source, Raw Story

I get what Arianna Huffington is trying to do here. From her perspective, The Huffington Post is much more than a partisan internet outpost. Much of the content of the site has nothing whatsoever to do with politics. Much of the news there has more of an honest vibe than a lefty vibe (though there is significant overlap there, from this reader's perspective). To a righty, any news or information that does not have a rightward cant is ipso facto lefty. The reverse isn't exactly true, is it?

I think what she's trying to say, is that while the site may have selected stories that would appeal to a progressive audience, that the stories themselves were not written with bias. What I'm not so sure about, is if she's saying that henceforth HuffPo is going to change the way stories are selected.

Regardless, Huffington has a very narrow line to walk here. She's got to try to keep her current audience; largely progressives and liberals, and probably people who don't consider themselves to be politically affiliated at all. At the same time, she's trying to woo people who might've stayed away previously, because of the liberal label. To make her brand as inviting as possible, she's trying to assure us that there is no overwhelming political skew going on here.  So, I get what she's trying to do. But she's not pulling it off very well. Arianna is as in-your-face as a drag queen. . .there's just no way for her to come off subtle. She needs to borrow Stephen Colbert's line: the truth has a well-known liberal bias.

[Excerpt]

Arianna: The Huffington Post is not a ‘lefty’ publication anymore



In a recent interview with The New York Times, Arianna Huffington revealed a bit of news that's not likely to show up on The Huffington Post's front page any time soon: the site is no longer "lefty" in its political bent. . .
 
Read more at: The Raw Story

Huffington Post Bought by AOL

I'm one of those weirdos who still uses AOL with frequency. Every day, in fact.  I use it at work, and I use it at home. A lot of the reason for that is that my personal email address and our work "base" address (other addresses are forwarded to it) are @aol.com. Having used those addresses since the mid-90s, I just never wanted to give them up. Plus, I quite like the AOL Desktop interface over any of the browsers out there.

Internet Explorer and Firefox have both gotten very good at what they do. But they can't replicate the way I work, a way I developed from using AOL for 16 years or so. Still, I know the (sometimes deserved, sometimes not) reputation AOL has. It used to be considered the internet with training wheels, and now it's just deemed obsolete. So I would have thought someone would have bought AOL before AOL bought somebody else. Apparently though, AOL is flush with cash, and wanted a big meaty content provider.

They found it in The Huffington Post. Arianna Huffington's baby grew into a media empire, and now they will be part of AOL, with Huffington in charge of content. It will be curious to see if HuffPo divests itself of its liberal image, or if AOL becomes LeftNet or something.  I used both quite a bit, so I'll be watching for sure.

[Excerpt]

AOL to buy The Huffington Post for $315 million




AOL Inc will buy Arianna Huffington's influential website for $315 million, looking to the high-profile liberal pundit to rescue it from the dustbin of Internet history. . .
 
Read more at: Reuters

Arianna Huffington: The Mystery of Palin's Popularity

Photo from HuffPost Email

Hey, I love Arianna Huffington, I love poking fun of Caribou Barbie, so how could I not post this? Especially with the hilarious picture.  Similar pictures of George W. Bush have the opposite effect on me, making my eye twitch and causing random muscles to spasm. But as long as Sarah Palin never attains any real position of power, I hope to be merely amused.  I do think that Huffington may be giving Palin a little too much credit in the article, but it's still a good read.

[Excerpt]

Sarah Palin, "Mama Grizzlies," Carl Jung, and the Power of Archetypes

. . .We are awash in crises right now -- crises that require smart and creative policy fixes. So why is somebody who so rarely deals in policy fixes so popular? It's because Palin's message operates on a level deeper than policy statements about the economy or financial reform or health care or the war in Afghanistan.


To really understand her appeal, we need less policy analysis and more psychology. Specifically, we need to hear from that under-appreciated political pundit Carl Jung. . .

Read more at: Huffington Post

Overtime with Bill Maher, March 5, 2010

Ep. 175: March 5, 2010 - Overtime

Arianna Huffington Slams Glenn Beck for Lies

I know that Arianna Huffington doesn't need any help from me to get blog hits. And I know that virtually anybody could make the case that Glenn Beck lies (and over emotes, and is a phony, and is a whack job, etc., etc.). But this was so good, I had to share.

[Excerpt]

Glenn Beck Goes After Me, But Forgets His Show Is on Video and Lies About Things He "Never, Never" Said



Following up on my back and forth with Roger Ailes yesterday on ABC's This Week, Glenn Beck went on his radio show today and attacked what I'd said about him -- and, in the process, ended up spewing a lot more misinformation.Following up on my back and forth with Roger Ailes yesterday on ABC's This Week, Glenn Beck went on his radio show today and attacked what I'd said about him -- and, in the process, ended up spewing a lot more misinformation. . .

Read more at: Huffington Post

Arianna Huffington: What if Jon Stewart Interviewed Dick Cheney?

Photo from Raw Story

I know I just linked to The Huffington Post in a recent post, but on my latest visit to the site, this story just jumped out at me. As proof that Arianna Huffington knows what she's doing, she hit upon a perfect analogy.

Recently, John King of CNN interviewed Dick Cheney. And the interview was not what you'd call "hard hitting." In fact, he seemed to be using right-wing talking points for his interview questions. So, what would happen if Jon Stewart interviewed Cheney? How do you think that would have gone?

[Excerpt]

What If Jon Stewart, Instead of John King, Interviewed Dick Cheney

Jon Stewart's Jim Cramer interview was a pivotal moment -- not just for Stewart, Cramer, and CNBC but also for journalism. It was a bracing reminder of what great research and a journalist more committed to getting to the truth than to landing the big get -- and keeping the big get happy, and ensuring future big gets -- can accomplish. . .

Read more at: Huffington Post

Arianna Huffington Subs for Rachel Maddow (with Bill Maher)

Arianna Huffington, proprietor of The Huffington Post, guest hosted on The Rachel Maddow Show, while Rachel is away on the Air America Radio cruise. HuffPost was one of my original inspirations to start blogging, and Rachel is my favorite pundit, so I had to watch.

My take? Truthfully, Ms. Huffington makes a better guest than a host. Her delivery is slow and measured, and a little too soft. Her accent takes getting used to, which is I'm sure why she was going slow and over-enunciating. But it was a marked contrast to Rachel's snappy patter.

Still, it was worth watching, especially for Arianna's interview with old sparring mate (when she was a Republican), Bill Maher.

Barack Obama. Too Tall?

Image by Editor

Arianna Huffington has a great post up right now, lamenting the ridiculous levels to which the Presidential campaign has sunk. She wonders how John McCain--having started these attacks at such an early date--will take the tone to a whole. 'Nother. Level.

It's a goood piece, and it offered me the opportunity to come up with a visual to go along with it. So here you go!

[Excerpt]

John McCain, Paris Hilton, and the Politics of Nothing

With just ninety days left in the election it's come down to this: our energy policy and a good deal of this presidential campaign are being discussed through the lens of Paris Hilton. What a big goof it all is! If you just ignore all the soldiers and civilians dying in the Mideast, and all the millions losing their homes and their jobs at home, you could really see the lighter side of it all. . .

. . .Here is a preview -- our best guess -- of what the McCain has in store for us:

"Too Tall." An ad claiming that proof of Obama's arrogance is his refusal to be as short as McCain (5' 6"). . .

Read more at: Huffington Post

Arianna Huffington on Karl Rove and Executive Privilege

Photo from source, Huffington Post

There is a lot in this article that is worth a read. I wish I had something to add that would be as elequent as what Arianna Huffington has to say here about Karl Rove, but I'm not as talented as she is. So I'll just be me. He's a pig. How's that?

[Excerpt]

Karl Rove's Contempt for the Constitution and the Public's Right to Know

Karl Rove ain't coming. And he ain't talking. Except on Fox News.
Despite being subpoenaed by the House Judiciary Committee to testify on his role in politicizing the Justice Department -- and in using the Department to selectively prosecute Democratic officials -- the erstwhile Boy Genius has announced that he won't be showing up at tomorrow's scheduled hearing. . .

Read more at: Huffington Post

Arianna Huffington on John McCain's Fantasy World

Photo from NY Times

I love Arianna Huffington, and need very little motivation to link to one of her posts. But the headline on this one was just irresistible. Hopefully, in the coming weeks (days, please?), Hillary Clinton will throw in the towel, and the general election will get started. Then, and only then, will John McCain be getting any attention like this from the mainstream media.

[Excerpt]

John McCain Trades Straight Talk for Unadulterated Fantasy

John McCain unveiled his new campaign strategy today: invite the American people to take a magic carpet ride with him to the land of Eternal Sunshine.

In a speech this morning in Ohio -- backed up by a companion TV ad -- McCain hopped into an imaginary time machine and took us all to the year 2013, offering a sneak peek of what the world will look like at the end of his first term as President. . .

Read more at: Huffington Post

Arianna Huffinton Busts John McCain on Bush Vote

Photo from source, Huffington Post

It has long been a hallmark of the Bush Administration to deny having ever said or done things that are easily provable to be lies. How many times has Dick Cheney conflated Iraq and 9/11, only to deny it later?

John McCain told Arianna Huffington that he didn't vote for George W. Bush. Arianna says otherwise. From this post, I'd say I side with Huffington. And I'll be very happy to see this kind of politics to come to an end. How about you?

[Excerpt]

What John McCain Told Me, and What it Says About How Far He's Fallen

Through a spokesperson with the colorful name Tucker Bounds, McCain has denied telling me he didn't vote for Bush in 2000. "It's not true," Bounds told the Washington Post, "and I ask you to consider the source."

My sentiments exactly -- because John McCain has a long history of issuing heartfelt denials of things that were actually true. . .

Read more at: Huffington Post

Arianna Huffington on the Right Wing Media

Image from Amazon.com

One of the most frustrating nuggets of "conventional wisdom" we liberal/progressives have to hear is liberal media bias. It is usually offered without any sort of evidence, as though it is just a fact. I often counter with, OK, outside of Countdown with Keith Olbermann which of the media is liberal? In return, the whole alphabet of ABCCBSNBCPBSMSNBCCNN is offered, but still with skimpy reasoning.

I long ago came to the conclusion that conservatives see any media that does not promote conservative bias is de facto liberal. I find that preposterous, and so does Arianna Huffington, proprietor of The Huffington Post. HuffPost was one of the primary influences and inspirations for this blog, and the following excerpt might give you a clue as to why I like it, and her so much.

[Excerpt]

Probing a Political Paradox: Why the Discredited Right Still Sets the Agenda and Dominates the Debate

It's a paradox: the political center has clearly shifted; what used to be considered "left wing" positions have now become part of the mainstream, and the views of the Right are now at odds with the majority of the American public -- and with reality.

Yet, despite this seismic shift -- grossly underreported by the media -- the Right remains as powerful as ever when it comes to setting the national agenda and dominating the national debate. . .

Read more at: Huffington Post

Arianna Huffington, Media Mogul

Photo from source, New York Times

I was inspired to create Greenlee Gazette while reading the Huffington Post one Sunday morning. Well that, and a ridiculous story playing on FOX "News" at the time. I link to the site fairly regularly, and so do lots of others. It's now even more popular than the right-wing The Drudge Report. Small wonder, as HuffPost is loaded with content, and Drudge is mostly links.

Anyway, the New York Times did a great write up on HuffPost's founder, Arianna Huffington. Take a look.

[Excerpt]

Citizen Huff

. . .When Ms. Huffington, the 57-year-old author and former conservative pundit, announced her plans for The Huffington Post three years ago, many critics dismissed the idea as a digital dinner party for her new liberal friends. But it has grown in ways that few, except perhaps Ms. Huffington herself, expected.

In February, The Huffington Post drew 3.7 million unique visitors, according to Nielsen Online, for the first time beating out The Drudge Report, the conservative tip sheet with which The Post is often compared. . .

Read more at: New York Times

Bill O'Reilly Calls Arianna Huffington a Nazi

Well, pretty much, anyway. This segment is so incredibly stupid, and hypocritical too, considering the fact that Bill O'Reilly's own web site has hosted vile comments as well. To compare Arianna Huffington to a Nazi, or to the Ku Klux Klan is just remarkably vile.

Let's get something straight. On political blogs like The Huffington Post or Democratic Underground on the left or Free Republic or Red State on the right, there are often nasty comments posted by readers. Both sides are guilty. But to hold the blog owner responsible is ludicrous. And if it were true, then Bill O'Reilly is engaging in a textbook example of the pot calling the kettle black.

Arianna Huffington Enjoys Some Huckenfreude

Most of Arianna Huffington's writing at The Huffington Post is excellent, but this particular piece is Arianna at her most insightful. I've written several posts lamenting the overt injection of religion into the political process, and here Ms. Huffington analyzes from whence it came. . .and the heartburn it's causing in the very people who put it there.

And the new word coinages are great: Huckenfreude, Huckicide, Huckaplomacy. . . Love it. Take it away, Arianna!

[Excerpt]

Huckabee: The GOP's Cynical Use of Religion Has Come Home to Roost

So why is the Republican establishment suddenly in a state of near-apoplexy about Mike Huckabee? Shouldn't they be happy? They've been cultivating evangelicals and fundamentalists for 30 years. Now they finally have a candidate who's truly part of the movement. So what's the problem?

Actually, that is the problem. The evangelical crowd was fine when it was just a resource to be cynically exploited every few years in demagogic anti-gay get-out-the-vote campaigns. But now the holy-rolling monster the GOP's Dr. Frankensteins have created has thrown off the shackles, fled the lab, and is currently leading in Iowa. And the party doesn't know what to do. . .

Read more at: Huffington Post