Washington Post Columnist Dana Milbank Confuses Hate And Violence
It is ironic that Dana Milbank accuses those who have criticized his column, calling into question the SPLC's hate group designation of The Family Research Council, of not being nuanced in their view of the situation. It is Dana who doesn't understand that you can be a hate group and not be violent. His view that it is violence that should trigger the "hate group" designation is deeply flawed. The lies that The Family Research Council spreads about the gay community can inspire violence. The SPLC calling them on that hatred is appropriate and necessary. From Michelangelo SignorileVia Huffington Post:
Milbank was invited on my SiriusXM show to discuss the column he wrote last week which has generated much controversy on social media. In the comments section on the Washington Post’s web site and on Twitter and Facebook, many criticized Milbank’s defense of the FRC as a “Washington think tank” which thus shouldn’t be called a hate group, and his calling the Human Rights Campaign and the SPLC “reckless” for terming the FRC a hate group. The controversy reached a point where Washington Post deputy editorial page editor Jonathan Diehl sent a tweet out defending Milbank, but that only inflamed the controversy as Dielhl referred to "idiotic' emails he had received on the topic....
...“The hate group category, is with the exception of the Family Research Council, a bunch of neo-Nazi and Ku Klux Klan-like groups, and while they may say all kinds of wacky things at the FRC, they’re a Washington think tank, not a group that puts on sheets and organizes lynch mobs,” Milbank said.
Milbank seemed not to know, nor would he address it when pointed out, that the SPLC lists many groups on its website that are not violent, or even claim to oppose violence, but which propagate hate as well. The hate group list includes the Nation of Islam and the Conservative Citizens Council.