Three of every four oil and gas lobbyists worked for federal government. With 600 lobbists who have very close relationships to DC, proposals to enact new restrictions or curb oil use have stalled amid concerted Republican opposition and strong objections from Democrats in oil-producing states.
After the crushing blow of Prop 8 passing in California and similar actions from Arizona, Florida, and Arkansas – it was nice to see the front page of the New York Times yesterday morning. Check out the great photo…
Equal rights to marriage started in Connecticut on Wednesday. Last month, the state’s highest court ruled that excluding gay couples from marriage was unconstitutional. Of course, the California Supreme Court made a similar ruling six months ago, until voters decided otherwise on Nov 4.
Joe Solmonese, President of the Human Rights Campaign, wrote an excellent letter in response to the ballot initiative loses…
“Now is the time to be constructive with our hurt and disappointment. This weekend, thousands in all 50 states will take to the streets with one common goal in mind—full equality for all—let us not forget that our cause is one of civil respect rooted in justice and fairness. Marchers will call not only for justice for LGBT families, but for an end to all the oppressions that hold our nation back and give the false impression that our differences are more profound than what we have in common. To locate a Join the Impact rally near you, visit http://jointheimpact.wetpaint.com/.”
Tomorrow – Saturday, November 15 – protests have been organized in every state to promote love and equality. Read Join The Imact's mission statement here. NYC’s protest will take place at 1:30pm at City Hall.
It's not entirely clear to me who has and has not been released at this point, but it is becoming clear that the Federal Government has been using classic union-breaking tactics in planning these raids, over months, targeting such dangerous terrorist groups as vegans and peace activists for infiltration and information about their activities—and even with full knowledge that they were not committing any acts of violence or terrorism, the police determined to stop them from exercising their rights to free speech and assembly.
I spent my Labor Day calling the mayors' offices and registering my shock and anger. I'll call again today, and I hope you will too.
Where is the line between using protest slogans and personal vignettes which abuse and manipulate our instinctual, emotive and subconscious reactions (linked to our own fears and pain) and utilizing persuasive arguments or portraying (other people's) personal experiences? A couple of examples which snagged me today while wandering around the blogsphere after the jump.
If you work in the non-profit sector, and if you work with any group people you refer to as "stakeholders" "constituents," "your base," or even "donors," you're probably very familiar with this term:
Engagement.
In a professional context, "to engage" is a transitive verb. It means "to get somebody involved with something, in the most general sense possible."
Non-profits love this word. It has no negative connotations, and even some positive ones (weddings!). It's innocuous and flexible, because it carries no implications of what kind of involvement it signifies.
For this reason, I am starting to dislike the term 'engagement.'
Usually, I am a total fan of words that other people would like to retire. I've actually gotten objects thrown at me in my office for enthusiastically defending the broad use of "tikkun olam," which many knowledgeable Jewish professionals consider way overplayed.
But engagement is different for me, and here's why.
