Comments on: Gay Activists Upset By Nats Vendor Policy http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2007/10/18/gay-activists-upset-by-nats-vendor-policy/ 68.3 Square Miles of D.C. News and Opinion Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:05:00 -0500 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: Nationals Power http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2007/10/18/gay-activists-upset-by-nats-vendor-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-42169 Nationals Power Fri, 19 Oct 2007 04:28:31 +0000 http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/index.php/2007/10/18/gay-activists-upset-by-nats-vendor-policy/#comment-42169 Regarding this statement: "But relations between the baseball team and gay activists are particularly touchy considering that the Nationals’ stadium required the destruction of the city’s largest—well, only—gay entertainment district, meaning even perceived or inadvertent slights are grounds for mistrust and bad feelings." Neither the Nationals nor the Lerner ownership group chose the new ballpark site. Unless I'm greatly mistaken, the site was chosen by the City Council and Mayor Williams. Holding the Nationals baseball club responsible for the so-called destruction of the city's gay entertainment district seems like mis-attributed blame. Regarding this statement: "But relations between the baseball team and gay activists are particularly touchy considering that the Nationals’ stadium required the destruction of the city’s largest—well, only—gay entertainment district, meaning even perceived or inadvertent slights are grounds for mistrust and bad feelings."

Neither the Nationals nor the Lerner ownership group chose the new ballpark site. Unless I'm greatly mistaken, the site was chosen by the City Council and Mayor Williams. Holding the Nationals baseball club responsible for the so-called destruction of the city's gay entertainment district seems like mis-attributed blame.

]]>