Stephanie Miller: “I apologize” re: Salvation Army being anti-gay

Stephanie Miller gets to keep her toaster after all.

We had reported yesterday that popular progressive talk radio host Stephanie Miller had a Salvation Army representative on her show Monday to talk about the perception that the organization is anti-gay.

The Salvation Army representative, George Hood, proceeded to lie to Stephanie about the Salvation Army’s atrocious four-decade record of anti-gay activism, and Miller appeared to agree with him that concerns about the Salvation Army being anti-gay were simply Internet lies.

They’re not.


A little singed for the experience, Stephanie Miller officially gets to keep her toaster.
(Toaster via Shutterstock)

The Salvation Army sees itself as a far-right evangelical church, going so far as to advocate for anti-gay legislation and policies in the United States and around the world.

The Salvation Army has been using a portion of your donations to their little kettles to advocate against the civil rights of gays and lesbians for decades, and they’re still doing it today.

The Salvation Army isn’t simply a charity that “happens” to be evangelical. The Salvation Army is a religious right charity that actively involves itself in promoting an anti-gay agenda. They are dedicated to opposing marriage equality. They are dedicated to advocating that all gays should be celibate. And they have repeatedly said that if you’re not gay and not celibate, then you’re not welcome to work in the upper levels of the Salvation Army.

And at that point, they’re not simply a charity that happens to be evangelical. They’re anti-gay religious right political activists who happen to do charity work. And I’m happy to help out charity when I can, but there are a lot of charities to give to, and I don’t need to give my money to someone who takes a portion of those donations in their little red kettles and sends them to the mother ship to advocate for anti-gay politics.

And yes, the money you put in that red kettle is being used to finance the Salvation Army’s campaign against gay and lesbian civil rights.  From Snopes:

The Salvation Army’s kettle campaign raises up to 70 percent of the Salvation Army’s total annual income.

By some reports, it’s as much as 88%.

And at least ten percent of those donations get sent to the higher levels of the Salvation Army to eventually be used as administrative costs for, among other things, anti-gay advocacy.  Who pays the guy to write the policy statement against local gay marriage legislation?  You do.  Don’t believe me about it, here’s the New York Times from last year:

George Hood, a Salvation Army spokesman, said all revenue from Salvation Army thrift stores is used locally. But he said a small percentage of money dropped into the red kettles finds its way to Washington — where it helps to pay the salaries of politically active staff members like Mr. Hood. Every local unit pays 10 percent of its revenue to a state or regional division — there are 40 divisions in the United States — and every division pays 10 percent of its revenue to one of four national territories, each of which foots a quarter of the national budget.

In other words, of a dollar dropped into a red kettle in New York City, a quarter of a penny ends up at national headquarters, where conversations with the government — not lobbying, Mr. Hood says — may take place.

Not lobbying?  Please.  What do you call conspiring with Karl Rove to make regulations more amenable to discriminating against gays in employment?  What do you call the Salvation Army weighing in, in country after country, against gay marriage, and in favor of anti-gay legislation, for decades now?  Not lobbying?  Please. Maybe it’s technically not “lobbying,” in the legal definition.  But is the Salvation Army using your money to advocate for evangelical causes, including bashing gays, at the federal level worldwide?  Yes.

Yet another lie through misdirection from the Salvation Army.

And note that, if it isn’t our old pal Salvation Army spokesman, George Hood, this time trying to downplay how much of your donations go to anti-gay advocacy.  Only a quarter of a percent of every penny donated through those Red Kettles goes to the evil Salvation Army religious right activists in Washington, DC.  That doesn’t sound like much, does it?

Let’s do the math, George, shall we?

I initially looked at the Salvation Army’s annual income, since that’s what Snopes said – 70% of their annual income comes from the Red Kettles.  Well, their annual income is $2.8 billion a year.  If you look at that figure, a huge amount of the Red Kettle money is going to the Salvation Army’s federal advocacy work against you and me, to the tune of $7m a year.

But if you look at it another way, it’s less, but not insignificant:

  1. Salvation Army’s Hood claims that “only” a quarter of each penny donated through those red kettles goes to the Salvation Army’s ant-gay advocacy and other government advocacy.
  2. We already know that up to 88% of the Salvation Army’s total annual income is raised from the Red Kettle campaign.  But let’s be conservative and use Snopes’ figure of 70% of the Salvation Army’s annual budget coming from the Red Kettles.
  3. The Salvation Army takes in $190.7 million each year in fundraising dollars.
  4. So 70% of that income comes from the Red Kettles – that would mean the Salvation Army makes $133m a year from its Red Kettles, and in fact I found a Salvation Army press release from 2011 in which they claim to have made $147.6m least year from their Red Kettle drive.
  5. “Only” 0.25 cents of every dollar donated (or 0.25%) to the Red Kettle goes to the anti-gay bigots running the Salvation Army in Washington, DC.  How much is 0.25% of $147.6m?  $369,000.
  6. So, our donations to the Salvation Army’s Red Kettles are earning the Salvation Army $369,000 every year to spend in Washington, DC to advocate against our civil rights.  

It ain’t nothing.

Of course, the Salvation Army reports that it actually gets $1.6 billion a year in direct support from the public, presumably from other donations beyond the Red Kettle.  Looking at that figure, and applying the same 0.25 cents of every suddenly you find that $4 million a year from the public goes to the Salvation Army’s evangelical advocacy at the federal level.

And that really ain’t nothing.

I also don’t give my money to liars.

STEPHANIE MILLER: We’ve gotten a lot of letters about the Salvation Army being anti-gay, can you address that?

SALVATION ARMY’S GEORGE HOOD: Well it’s a great misunderstanding that’s spread across the country, and we’re doing everything we can to re-educate and help people understand that the very mission of the Salvation Army calls for meeting the needs of humans without discrimination…. So discrimination is not something that we would gladly carry the banner or pride over, we want to dispel the notion that we do discriminate when the fact is we’re working very hard not discriminating and it is a part of our mission…. Many of those things start fueling through blog sites and postings on the Internet and it’s really really tough to shut them down when they get out there.

That is a lie.  Straight from the mouth of the Salvation Army’s number one spokesman who has held the job for years.  The Salvation Army isn’t trying to make amends for years of anti-gay prejudice.  They’re out there actively lying about their record, and smearing those of who hold them accountable for their bigotry by accusing us of spreading Internet lies on “blog sites and postings on the Internet.”

Nothing says “bad apple” like a church that thinks it’s best defense is a lie.

I won’t go through the entire litany of the Salvation Army’s anti-gay pedigree, but here are a few headline from just this year alone.2012

  • Salvation Army official says gays deserve to die.
  • Salvation Army headquarters calls homosexuality “an uncontrollable urge” that need to be suppressed.
  • Salvation Army says they’ll discriminate in hiring against any gays who aren’t celibate.
  • Salvation Army UK and Australi take public position against marriage equality in effort to block local pro-gay marriage legislative efforts.
  • Salvation Army reportedly fires employee for being bisexual.

Stephanie Miller, to her great credit, along with Bill Press (with whom she was hosting a charity fundraiser for the Salvation Army), has called off her charity fundraiser, and will be giving the donations raised to the Trevor Project. Stephanie also gave a sincere mea culpa this morning on her show, along with Bill. Which was exactly the right thing to do.

Here’s Stephanie’s statement, and there’s a longer discussion of this issue on her show today, in the video below. Thanks, Stephanie – we always knew you were a good progressive, and today you’re reconfirmed it.

Monday on my Current TV program Talking Liberally, broadcast simultaneously on my national radio program, The Stephanie Miller Show, I announced that my friend and colleague Bill Press and I were launching a three-week competition to raise money for the Salvation Army to help Americans in need.

This was in conjunction with an advertising buy by the Salvation Army on Current TV. We all thought that we were doing something positive in the spirit of the holiday season.

Where I screwed up was in not doing more research about the Salvation Army’s long and checkered history involving LGBTQ people and our issues. I sincerely apologize for that.

When I returned from the Thanksgiving holiday, I learned a lot more — much of of it from friends like John Aravosis at America Blog and Michelangelo Signorile at Sirius OutQ — and I decided that, effective immediately, Talking Liberally and The Stephanie Miller Show would no longer be a part of the Salvation Army’s Online Red Kettle Campaign.

Please understand that I do believe the Salvation Army does much good work in the world and I also believe in redemption. I sincerely hope they will change their mission statement and policies regarding the LGBTQ community and I am very willing to continue that dialogue with them.

Through yesterday, your generosity has raised $1,150 for the Salvation Army in the Stephanie Miller Red Kettle.

I am now going to personally match that amount with a donation to the Trevor Project, whose work and mission I can endorse without any reservation. The Trevor Project provides crisis intervention and suicide prevention services to LGBTQ youth.

As always, I am grateful to my viewers and listeners for holding me to the high standards that I always try to set for myself.



Don’t forget to download and print off your vouchers, below, to put in those Red Kettles – this is a donation of good advice that the Red Cross really needs.salavation army vouchers anti-gay

Follow me on Twitter: @aravosis | @americablog | @americabloggay | Facebook | Instagram | Google+ | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in Washington, DC. .

Share This Post

73 Responses to “Stephanie Miller: “I apologize” re: Salvation Army being anti-gay”

  1. Welcome to the Salvation Army fan club.

  2. will says:

    who cares

  3. the word says:

    Gays are sad, confused people who are attracted to their own image, a narcissistic psychological problem related to over indulging parents.

  4. rob says:

    The Salvation Army is a bigoted hate organization that needs to be brought down BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.

  5. Sweetie says:

    She basically admitted to it. The other possibility is that she’s really that incompetent (to make such a big bold claim without doing any research).

  6. ribbie149 says:

    She made a mistake, admitted it, apologized SINCERELY for it, and made a contribution to try to atone for it. Sometimes progressives (whom I count myself among) make me sick with their carping and lack of flexibility. I am sure you are all infallible.

  7. David Vazquez says:

    I’m sure Miller’s 5 listeners/viewers were upset by this.

  8. jamjar7 says:

    Here in Central Ohio, the Salvation Army provides judgement free assistance to the poorest of the poor AND ANYONE else who needs help … without discrimination. Attached video is from 2 years ago, of Salvation Army Partnership with Columbus Gay Men’s Choir. (Note: this was weekend before the president signed Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Repeal) I was there, but did not take this video

  9. Sweetie says:

    She isn’t stupid enough for this to have been a mistake, in terms of her not thinking to do the research. She chose to make big bold claims and a person doesn’t do that without having put thought into it. I see this as backtracking on a gambit that didn’t play out as anticipated.

    Here’s the thought:

    “This was in conjunction with an advertising buy by the Salvation Army on Current TV.”

  10. Insipid47 says:

    There’s a reason she sounds like a morning DJ: SHE IS A MORNING DJ!
    See, before you made that post you should of researched carefully to find out just who and what Stephanie Miller is. The fact that you made a mistake- by your logic- makes you a moron not worthy of being listened to.
    Furthermore, if you had done your research, you’d know that Stephanie Miller has a long history of working for LGBT causes. The fact that you’re willing to write her off for one mistake says more about you than her.
    Maintaining blind and irrational hatred is something for the right-wing. A very wise liberal said something great about casting stones.

  11. Jay says:

    She should not have a radio show if she doesn’t know something as basic of the bigotry of the SA. This is not something new. They have been campaigning against gay rights for decades. Ignorance is no excuse.

  12. dcinsider says:

    The apology contained a lot of rubbish about ‘perhaps they are trying to change” when, in fact, there is not a single shred of evidence that this is true. And they insisted on saying what a terrific organization they are and what good work they do. OK, well the Klan helps out folks too. As does the Catholic Church and the Mormons. The fact that a group of vile despicable bigots also does some good work is not at all relevant. I thought the apology sucked, and I think this woman is a moron and will never listen to her show. They sounded like morning DJs. I get that John likes her, whatever. She’s obviously a buffoon and she is simply not worthy of this publicity.

  13. Jim Olson says:

    When was the last time you saw an actual uniformed SA person ringing a bell? Most of the time these folks look slightly scary, really down on their luck. I’d rather just give them the money personally than put it in the kettle.

  14. Jim Olson says:

    These vouchers are great, but need a more current quote.

  15. Sue Cohen says:

    Hurray for Steph and Bill Press for apologizing and ending their sponsorship–See CONS? This is the difference between we liberals–when we make a mistake –we take accountability and make amends! Both Steph and Bill are donating an equal amount to charities that do not discriminate!

  16. fredndallas says:

    You raise excellent points about the blurs and incompetence in the “media” culture, absolutely emphasized by Current’s little promotion for a charity with vile practices. If we don’t challenge this unacceptable practice of cozy, it will only continue to worsen.

  17. fredndallas says:

    YES, Becca, isn’t that something! That possibility lurked in the back of mind, but I thought “oh, surely not.” That tarnish on Current and its principles (and principals) is stunning.

  18. A reader in Colorado says:

    She didn’t do that with Salvation Army specifically. And, sorry, I should have clarified, though I did further down in the post. “These people” could have left the perception that I meant Rachel Maddow had also let Salvation Army slide. That is not what I meant to say, sorry. But what I meant was this phenomenon in general is not rare these days. I meant “these people” to mean people representing themselves as something they are not and being allowed to get away with it.

    You know, sheisters. Liars. People posing as something they are not.

    She did/does things like leaving assertions unchallenged and backgrounds unexposed with Ed Rendell and known bad actors like Evan Bayh, and various stable pundits on MSNBC, including such people in the past as Pat Buchanan, until the stench of him got too much for even MSNBC to bear.

    In addition to all the MSNBC people like Al Sharpton and Lawrence O’Donnell using known anti-Social Security Trojan Horse Ed Rendell in addition to treating Dana Milbank as if he’s some kind of credible person after his defending of anti-gay death celebrator Tony Perkins. She let Blue Dog Evan Bayh lie on her show like a sailor and never followed up saying he was lying on her show like a sailor.

    This is all part of a piece of softball journalism toward people various show pundits see as “on their side” or at least neutral.

    They deserve to be shamed because they refuse to expose people within their stable as being what they are. Ed Rendell is not some neutral defender of Social Security – he’s part of some self aggrandizing banker group.called “Fix the Debt” in addition to having a bankster’s financial interest in trashing Social Security and Medicare.

    Not saying that – not saying what Ed Rendell is involved with when Ed Rendell is on is the MSNBC hosts being flat out dishonest. It’s not letting people know people’s true agendas when they have backgrounds like that is flat out dishonest.

    And it’s not just her.

    This post was about honesty and research in journalism and this goes deeper than just Stephanie Miller not doing her research and failing to call out Salvation Army on their lies. This is part of a pattern of treating people who deserve to be scrutinized and their associations exposed with softball journalism. And deliberately letting people represent themselves as something they are not, which is worse.

    By the way, Ed Rendell was on Al Sharpton’s show TODAY. His association with “Fix the Debt” is still not discussed on MSNBC when he comes on. And yes it’s similar to the Stephanie Miller situation with Salvation Army – gushing about people as if they’re something they’re not and leaving negative backgrounds unexposed.

    At least Stephanie Miller though has the blanket of an innocent mistake. One cannot say that with MSNBC’s knowing kid gloves hands of treatment of their stable pundits Ed Rendell and Dana Milbank.

  19. Drew2u says:

    I’m more impressed that she’s matching donations to the Trevor Project. Apologies are one thing, atoning for it is another.

  20. karmanot says:

    Still, something about a closet case ringing a bell in uniform is kind-of kinky.

  21. karmanot says:

    “Redemption” is a powerful word, reflecting in its pure meaning the positive change of karma. In my day, during the worst of the plague years, I frequently saw families turn, when one of their own died horribly of HIV/AIDS and they saw the compassion and strength of the GLTBQ communities put their own hateful fundamentalism to shame.

  22. sherman says:


    Current came go Steph and Press with the suggestion of a contest. It is quite reasonable to assume that Steph figured that Current had done the research, particularly since they are in much better position to have research staff than Steph.

  23. casual_peruser says:

    In what way has Rachel Maddow given “these people a voice and leave unchallenged lies lying there”? I’d be surprised to find out that Maddow enabled Salvation-Army-type bigots. When did she do that? Why is Maddow on your personal list of people who “ought to be publicly shamed for such deception”? What deception? Maddow has been effective in delivering smackdowns of establishment Republicans like John McCain and Mitt Romney, which I suppose doesn’t sit well with some.

  24. Cletus says:

    question, sentence fragment user?

  25. unclemike says:

    This was not about the Boy Scouts. It was about the Salvation Army. How could you make this blunder? I mean five minutes on the internet and you could know all you need to know.

  26. unclemike says:

    That’s okay, I’ll listen twice to make up for your loss, Tony.

  27. basenjilover says:

    Glad you called Stephanie/Bill out on Salvation Army’s anti gay policies. Thank the heavens/gods for you and Americablog staff!

  28. M.j. Kroner says:

    In the early days of the labor movement, the Salvation Army preached that workers should take whatever their bosses saw fit to dish out, instead of organizing to improve working conditions and pay. The Industrial Workers of the World songwriter Joe Hill parodied them, coining a phrase that became part of the language:
    “…You will eat, by and by,
    In that glorious land beyond the sky.
    Work and pray, live on hay!
    You’ll get pie in the sky when you die.
    (That’s a lie.)”

  29. Merv says:

    Yes as a listener I do accept her apology but I am really dissapointed in her lack of professionalism. It would have taken simple research to find the facts about the scouts . I mean really. Its the boy scouts. They are huge. They have been around forever. How could you make this blunder. I mean five minutes on the internet and you could know all you need to know. Apologies are great but how about you know your subject no matter who they are before you pick up the microphone. In the age of the internet it ain’t that hard

  30. TonyT says:

    Steph and Chris her producer are gay. Jim the “sidekick” voice deity is not.

  31. see ya later, Tony-you were never on board in the first place

  32. relevance, redneck?

  33. A reader in Colorado says:

    I’m sorry, after-the-fact disclaimers just don’t have the force of the original It’s good that it was done, but it’s too little, too late.

    It’s very very important that people like Stephanie Miller, Rachel Maddow, or the various others who have given these people a voice and leave unchallenged lies lying there, should not do so in the first place, rather than reacting or apologizing afterwards.

    It’s not too much to ask to have these people do their research. And giving a forum to haters or supporters of haters while not referencing their support of hate is no better.

    Dana Milbank, for instance, should be asked to answer for his defense of gay death supporter Perkins, right on MSNBC.

    Ed Rendell, for instance, should be made to answer for his anti-social security hucksterism in the context of his membership in organizations explicitly standing to profit from the destruction of social programs, regardless of anything else he is ever asked. ( Right on MSNBC.

    Both are on MSNBC shows, and get away with their pernicious representation for these causes because they are not asked about them. Few people understand that when Dana Milbank speaks, he speaks from a position of defending someone who explicitly celebrates the Uganda government’s thirst for death.

    Few people understand that when Ed Rendell is asked about Social Security, on MSNBC, he is speaking about Social Security from a position of explicitly being in bed with bankers who wish to profit from the privatization and destruction of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

    (And, yes, Stephanie Miller is on Current. No better).

    In both circumstances MSNBC shamelessly uses both individuals in their broadcasts while explicitly claiming to be liberal. Ed Rendell is explicitly paraded around as someone who supports liberal positions on Social Security. Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz and Lawrence O’Donnell ought to be publicly shamed for such deception.

  34. cole3244 says:

    a progressive should know better and do their homework, embarrassment cures many ills.

  35. sherman says:

    Exactly. On her show today she noted it’s basically a 3-4 person operation. She doesn’t have a research department, or damage control people.

    Her response to making a mistake should be an example to others of how to accept responsibility and make amends.

  36. Butch1 says:

    It has ;been decades since I have dropped money into those red pots. I’m always cordial to them but there will never be a dime flying their direction.

  37. Cletus says:

    John, I don’t think I saw you mention it, but I wondered if everyone was aware that Steph and the “Mooks” are Gay?

  38. tsuki says:

    Steph is a classy lady.

  39. tamarz says:

    There was a time, I think, when the Salvation Army was not engaged in political action of any sort. My mother was an old-fashioned social worker, a Jewish/athiest/left-wing/activist social worker who had no patience for religious organizations. But she liked the Salvation Army because when one of clients (all of them were poor and desperately in need of food, shelter and/or medical care) needed something, she could call the Salvation Army and with no red tape or delay, they would help the person. But that was some 50 years ago. They’re no longer the purely religious, purely mission-driven organization they used to be. If my mother were alive, she’d be angry at how they’ve joined the right-wing hate fest.

  40. FLL says:

    I was wondering about whether Miller’s employers at Current TV were pressuring her to be “nice” to the Salvation Army since they had just bought advertising time. It’s an interesting factor, but we’ll probably never know.

  41. Stev84 says:

    >”The Salvation Army is a religious right charity that actively involves itself in promoting an anti-gay agenda”

    The Salvation Army is a fundamentalist church that masquerades as a charity

  42. karmanot says:

    Excellent work John, well done!!! Like+ I had a little trouble garnering the meaning of this phrase though: “if you’re not gay and not celibate, then you’re not welcome to work in the upper levels of the Salvation Army.” Did you mean: “if you’re gay and not celibate”?

  43. Sweetie says:

    The need for charity goes up in a poorly governed society. Want to be truly charitable? Fix governance.

    People should feel guilty for giving money to charities because the needs of the citizenry should be met by our elected representatives.

  44. Sweetie says:

    Money quote: “This was in conjunction with an advertising buy by the Salvation Army on Current TV.”

  45. FLL says:

    This was an honest apology, not the sarcastic parody of an apology that has become all too frequent in current American discourse. There was no “sorry if anyone was offended” nonsense, which implies that the person making the sarcastic apology said nothing wrong, and people are just being too thin-skinned. She simply and honestly admits being wrong. That point, I’ll give to Miller.

    I’ll have to disagree with Miller’s use of the word “checkered” to describe the Salvation Army’s record on equality and fairness. Their record is consistently bigoted, not checkered, so I can’t give that point to Miller.

    Miller mentions failing to research the Salvation Army’s record, which strikes me as very incurious since the Salvation Army’s bigoted policies have been a topic of discussion for the last 20 years or so. I can’t give Miller any points here for the curiosity that always marks good journalism, but maybe this episode will make her more curious about current topics.

    She was gracious to give John and Michelangelo Signorile credit for being good journalists themselves. At least she had the class to acknowledge fine journalism in others when she sees it, and she deserves points for that. On the whole, this was at least an honest apology, which is what really counts.

  46. That’s an excellent point – look at that ridiculous non-apology the NFL guy gave, before he suddenly got scared.

  47. Yes, it’s only liberals :)

  48. FunMe says:

    Exactly! You can be funny and smart at the same time!

  49. LOL I think they’re in duck and cover mode.

  50. Well thanks :) And Chris’ and Gaius’ too :), and Jon Green, and Matt BH and Ortiz and Andoe :)

  51. FunMe says:

    Noticed how she didn’t say “I’m sorry you were offended”

  52. Insipid47 says:

    Stephanie Miller is not a journalist, she’s a talk show host. While it’s nice for her to do research she does not have the same obligation to do so as David Gregory (though he doesn’t do it either). I had no idea about the anti-gay bias of the SA. She made a mistake, she admitted it.
    I don’t see the sense in questionining her motivation or character over a mistake. I feel she’s a good person who wanted to do good.

  53. FunMe says:

    “friends like John Aravosis at America Blog” … so you are friends! :-)

  54. FunMe says:

    Wow, very impressive. I give her credit for admitting a mistake and saying I’m sorry.
    Do only liberals and progressives do this?

    Imagine, Carnival Cruises apologizing that fast? Life would go on and no one would die or be “traumatized” by seeing drag queens … on a draq show!

  55. ComradeRutherford says:

    How does Miller and CurrentTV even do something this unbelievably boneheaded?

  56. JamesR says:

    Filthy lucre!

    CurrentTV is behaving as badly as Air America. Stephanie and all their hosts need to work extra hard doing their homework and covering their asses to avoid more inevitable conflicts in the future, they probably want their careers to last longer than that network.

  57. ostracario says:

    I hate to make a con/lib comparison here but a con would have said “I’m sorry why I said/did offended you.” Stephanie, a proud lib, said “Boy did I mess up. I’m so sorry that I didn’t do a better job!” They dropped the ball but they recovered very quickly!

    Good work John!

  58. Tony Dickens says:

    Sorry Stephanie. You should have been a responsible talk show host and researched SA BEFORE having a spokesman for them on your show and agreeing with them. You also continued to raise money for them. I’m happy you’re donating to the Trevor Project, but your apology is too little too late. I will never listen to your program because of this major screw-up of yours.

  59. JamesR says:

    Thank You John, and Thank You Stephanie.

    …anybody from Carnival reading these threads?

  60. ostracario says:

    The ones that I pass as manned by people so old that I sometimes want to put a mirror to their lips to see if they’re still breathing. Even though I don’t make eye contact I can feel their sad little eyes looking at me, pleading for money. NO WAY IN HELL!

  61. Blogvader says:

    This is one of the reasons why I know God cannot exist.

    Would a loving, benevolent God really put such incredible resources in the hands of such disgusting people?

  62. David Rich says:

    I completely agree. I passed a kettle about a week ago and thought I should pitch in, but something said no. Sadly, I couldn’t remember the exact reason why. With this brewhaha, it reminded me why. I will promptly donate to a pro-LGBTQ organization. And I do want to say thanks to John for the story and to Ms. Miller for her correction! Liberals have such…integrity.

  63. I also want to acknowledge your more than excellent work on this and throughout the political spectrum.

  64. Indigo says:

    Apology accepted. Don’t do it again.

  65. BeccaM says:

    And there’s the smoking gun, by the way: The Miller & Press ‘Red Kettle’ contest and the fawning interview on Stephanie’s show were prompted by the Salvation Army making an advertising buy on Current TV.

    Money trumped good sense and conscience. No doubt there’s a management memo or email somewhere telling Miller and Press to give the Salvation Army positive, uncritical coverage.

  66. Ken Daniels says:

    I wish Stephanie would put as much effort and energy into researching her guests as she does playing silly sound effects and funny voices.

  67. PeteWa says:

    nice work, great to see a positive and speedy resolution.

  68. TonyT says:

    This should shown to anyone in the public eye on how to handle a mistake. Admit it. Sincerely apologize and correct it. Not only Public Relations 101 but Doing the Right Thing 101.

    p.s. Why do I always fall in love with gay women! Love you Steph.

  69. I still feel guilty when I pass the kettles. I know that the volunteers may not feel the same as the Salvation Army’s big wigs. Kind of the same thing when Cub Scouts are hawking something at the grocery store.

  70. indep_in_la says:

    I sent email to Stephanie and her crew about doing better research. A response I got from her producer was that I should have listened to the interview, to which I replied that I did. I then asked if they had read your article which I had forwarded in my initial email. Obviously someone decided not to take the word of a liar as truth just because they bought ad time. Thanks for keeping us informed.

  71. keirmeister says:

    Gotta admit, I hate it when mommy and daddy fight (even when daddy is right). I love Stephanie Miller and Bill Press, but John was totally correct here.

    But Stephanie, babe, your statement was the definition of class – and THAT’s why we love our liberals!

  72. Thanks. And I really am pleased, and proud, that Stephanie (and Bill Press) both immediately recognized the problem here, and fixed it. It’s to their credit.

  73. caphillprof says:

    Keep up the good work, John.

© 2020 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS