I still maintain that the stories are, first, the investigation into the cause of death for Mr. Pettway and, second, the allegations that the City turned a blind eye in exchange for political contributions. If the Club activities, legal or not, contributed to his death then they need to be held accountable, but that is still very much open to investigation. A man died and that should be investigated. The issue of the "pay for play" are much less easier to investigate.
Also, she draws attention to the formation of Mayor Steelerstahl's GLBT Advisory Board (couldn't have come at a better time!) and some reasons to be skeptical of the process:
They are not returning my calls regarding either the [selection] criteria or the campaign contributions and so I have no confidence in this process. I might be proven wrong and the Mayor will cobble together a truly diverse group of voices with little to no political campaign contributions. As is apparent, he has the ear of one segment - the white gay male business owners who are in a position to make significant contributions to his campaign.
Now, we move to What Comes After 8, Pgh? (which may not necessarily identify itself as a political blog or even a gay blog, but gay politics has been on the menu and I've only got so many dishes ready to serve). Christopher takes a more cautious, one-day-at-a-time line toward the MSM's handling of scandal -- but has been offering an illuminating perspective on "bathhouses" (and there seems to be some consensus that Club Pittsburgh constitutes a bathhouse):
So, I'm sorry to offend, people. I get that it's a thing many queers do, and you know what, if you choose to do it, I don't judge you. I don't think you're a terrible person. I can even understand why you might want to do it. I do have a healthy supply of testosterone, after all. But you'll never get me to say it's a good idea. And you'll never convince me that it is something we should use our credibility or political capital to try to save or help defend.
There was more a while earlier, under a great post title:
More defending the indefensible. I am sure the owners of Club Pittsburgh are nice, charming, and philanthropic. But the fact remains that they operate a business that encourages
But that doesn't mean that the people who operate Club Pittsburgh ultimately have clean hands. And that doesn't give the city leeway to improperly squelch an investigation. And it certainly means that I don't have to try and defend the indefensible.
More than anything else, both are encouraging people to attend this evening's hearing on the county-wide anti-discrimination ordinance.
Meanwhile, the City Paper provides more in-depth coverage of last Saturday's rally:
The author of the bill, County Councilor Amanda Green, received the greatest applause. "It's very important for county council members to know that I'm not making this stuff up," she said, noting that LGBT county residents have been denied housing, fired from employment and given "less than acceptable" public accommodations -- all three areas covered by the proposed law.
Her bill, which once had 12 co-sponsors, now has only seven. She said her colleagues who wavered may claim that "no one in their district is complaining to them, no one is talking about it. I wonder why no one is complaining about it" -- thanks to the lack of protections, she said.
The CP website also provides video of various community advocates and public officials trying to out-Milk each other in the freezing cold. Oh wait -- it's via YouTube! Don't touch that dial...