I’m still sick as a dog, hacking shit up and feeling miserable, but I have to get this off my chest.
Could someone please tell Andrew Sullivan and the rest of the crowd that the last President, a fellow named Bush, dedicated his administration to openly persecuting homosexuals through the FMA and through ballot initiatives in tight races in 2004 all while his Justice department refused to hire and even fired gays and lesbians or anyone who had any ties to organizations that might associate with gays and lesbians.
The President before him, a Democrat by the name of Clinton, passed DADT and signed DOMA.
Now, you have a President who not only campaigned on and has stated repeatedly that he will work to end DADT, DOMA, and any number of other issues important the cause, but who went to the HRC, proudly took the podium, and advocated his support for their cause in front of the entire nation.
And the result? He’s getting shit on for not doing things fast enough. It is almost like they think the speech to the HRC was a policy meeting that was supposed to unleash the new steps the administration is taking to achieve these goals. It wasn’t. This was a speech to the HRC, but this was also a speech to the entire country. Yes, you have every right to be pissed at the current state of affairs, because I sure would be pissed at being treated as a second class citizen if I were gay, and yes, if I had my way these things would already have been taken care of, and yes, you may have heard parts of his speech a year ago.
Big difference though. Then, it was Candidate Obama. Now, it is President Obama. And while you may be too shortsighted to recognize it right now, it was a pretty damned big deal what happened last night. So some perspective would be nice.
/rant
neill
I guess what Obama meant when he said he didn’t have the right to tell folks to be patient was:
“Don’t piss off John Cole, he’s got a horrible cold and he’s liable to be really cranky…”
celticdragon
Perspective?
Really?
Our perspective is that we are going to keep getting uplifting speeches while Sunday talkshow guests demur that “his plate is too full” to actually do anything…
Our community is a giant cash cow that can be milked indefinitely while nothing substantive is given in return…and we know it.
That is why we are pissed and making noise. I will not give one red cent more, nor donate any more time to this pPsident until I see him actually show some God damned guts and do something!
BDeevDad
Jon Stewart discussed this with Sec of Navy last week. What many fail to comprehend is DADT and DOMA are laws. Obama can scream from the bully pulpit until he’s blue in the face. Congress has to repeal it first.
celticdragon
He has not even remotely tried to use the bully pulpit. He has not expended one iota of his capital to move anything through Congress…and DADT is rejected by something like 60% plus of the American people!
When the hell are we going to see some courage instead of poll watching and nice words?
2020?
The Main Gauche of Mild Reason
I think the other aspect that being neglected is the fact that the military officer corps (esp the Air Force) has become more wingnutiffied than at any point in its recent history. I suspect this is why the whole DADT thing is moving so slowly; because they need to build enough support from within the officer community and congress so military leadership won’t go nuts.
beltane
Someone over at Kos has a diary up referring to Sullivan as an “annoying, bitchy, queen”. He is, of course, being HR’d as we speak. Your post is better thought out and not at all offensive, but makes the same point.
Lots of people seem to have developed the Verruca Salt syndrome, they want what they want and they want it NOW!! It is not universal. Pam Spaulding, for one, was very happy with the speech.
John Cole
WTF do you think the speech was last night? When the President speaks, that is the bully pulpit. Christ on a fucking crutch, you think there is a pulpit somewhere with a sign on it that says “BULLY?”
Barbara Ann Levy
THANKS!!!!
I feel the same way and wonder whose on first in the glbt community ? Provocateur writers? Have they lost their perspective? I think so. I was more than aggravated last night after I was moved to tears like I haven’ t been moved for many years..not since MLK’s “I have a dream” speech! Obama’s speech was THAT powerful and then came a barrage of sour puss sentiment. Off the wall!
BB
I’m a little surprised that John takes this perspective. But he’s right.
Thinking back the last 30 years, I can’t think of a piece of domestic legislation that will affect more Americans more significantly than Health Care Reform. It was absolutely worth clearing the agenda over. And no, it would not have been possible to have Congress consider both issues at the same time.
One thing we’ve seen is that despite the tantrums of wingnuts or even the more impatient elements on the left, Obama does get it done. Continue to press him, fine. But at the end of four years, I think he’ll have dealt with quite a bit of this.
Obviously, I don’t have the same view as the OMG YOU PROMISED ME MY THING DO IT NOW!! crowd. Maybe we do need both. As long as we have differences on the approach (and, IMO, on a sense of political reality), I really agree with the gist of John’s point. Perspective- more please.
El Cruzado
That said, Andrew Sullivan DOES often behave like a drama queen. More power to him for that, but there’s nothing wrong with pointing it out either.
jakester
Thank you, John. I honestly can’t believe that these guys don’t know how ridiculous they sound. OBAMA is the bad guy? Obama? Really?
All I can say is that this homo thanks his lucky stars every day that we have a president bright enough not to let his presidency get torpedoed by something as minor as gays in the military in the first months of his first term. He needs to use every precious cent of his political capital to get health care passed – something that will help far more gays, in far more concrete ways, than allowing gays & lesbians to serve openly in the military. Instead of biting the president’s ankles about DADT we should be organizing counter protests, with our allies, in the face of the town hall debacles and tea party insanity. Use the energy we had during the campaign to continue to fight for progressive change. I think we’ll be surprised, then, how soon we end up getting not just gays in the military but a whole host of other rights.
Allan
I stopped reading Sully. The sun still comes up in the morning and everything. You should try it.
I actually believe, counter to the conventional wisdom, that the Obama administration is NOT doing too much at once, rather they are not doing ENOUGH at once.
The “one big issue at a time” approach may allow the administration to focus its messaging, but it also allows the opposition to do the same.
The administration should be moving simultaneously on so many fronts that it overwhelms the opposition noise machine. This increases the possibility that they will let loose with off-message mistakes as the discussion jumps from one issue to the next.
Of course, it would help if Obama’s senior advisers and Cabinet secretaries could actually lead campaigns to sell ideas and reforms. If health care reform is the focus, then where the hell is Kathleen Sibelius? Oh, that’s right, the one time we sent her out to speak on the Sunday shows, we had to correct the misimpression she created on Monday…
celticdragon
It was a speech to a group and nothing more.
Nothing at all. Not a speech to the American people. Not a speech to Congress. It was boilerplate and future promises to well heeled donors and should be taken for the hollow farce that it is.
Senator Reid has written to the President asking for help and guidance on what to do wrt DADT…and the silence has been deafening.
Bully pulpit indeed.
celticdragon
He hasn’t been called “the bad guy”.
I’m calling his gutless until I see him actually do something more then give us empty promises.
beltane
@John Cole: Was he banging his shoe on the bully pulpit? Did he threaten to shut down the government unless DADT and DOMA are repealed by tomorrow morning at 9:00 am?
I think this is what some people have in mind when they hear the words “bully pulpit”.
Ann
Thanks for sharing!?!
But I agree with everything after the first line of your post.
Sentient Puddle
@celticdragon:
Write a bill that says something to the effect of “Be it resolved that the bill known as ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is hereby repealed,” maybe?
I don’t exactly see what kind of guidance is necessary…
General Winfield Stuck
First sentence from Sullivan. Did I miss something. Has Obama been presnit for 3 years. As a candidate didn’t he say he was going get rid of DADT, and on one occasion say something similar about DOMA, that btw is still not supported by a large majority of voters.
Watching a little Sunday gibberish this morning I heard several dems asked directly whether they would vote to repeal DOMA, and they answered with the current weather report, or, not touching that question with a ten foot pole, And Obama, that slacker, takes it on on national Teevee.
I am sorry that DADT and DOMA got passed and it is wrong that they did, but there is a reason for that, and it is that most Americans wanted it that way. Not fair, not right, but the truth. And though less so, it still is the truth. There are no heros in public office. There are only risks and courage, and Obama took one and showed some last night.
Rhoda
For eight years this country has been falling behind: economically, in civil rights, education, basic infrastructure, and we went to war and cut taxes.
It was a bad time for the empire.
People seem to believe that Obama can come in and enact the policies he campaigned on: hello. He had to first use up a lot of capital getting the stimulus through and bringing this country back from the brink. If the Democrats had a brain, they’d have done the stimulus under Bush as a part of TARP. Better politics, shock would have forced a more Kenysian stimulus, and just as Paulson had a gun to their head they had an ace too. But no, we bailed out main street without bailing out Wall Street and no one thought to do both at the same time.
So, stimulus. Then this health care fight. He’s got cap and trade to try for. And we need a second stimulus because they fucked up the politics of the first and didn’t go big enough.
Not to mention those two wars and an emerging problem in Pakistan, the problem of Yemen, Somalia, hell he had to deal with pirates!
So immigration isn’t happening this year; that’s a biggie too. And cap and trade won’t happen, and it’s going to be a fight to get financial regulations set up. He’s got a lot of shit on his plate. And he’s promised to end DADT. So why not focus on Congress and the state ballot issues. That seems more productive than bitching out the president and weakening the democratic coalition.
If DADT isn’t done by 2012 IMO, then folks can take it out on him at the ballot box and withhold money. That’s a fair assessment. But nine months in when he’s reiterating his promises; give him some space and push democrats running in 2010 who you have leverage over. And call the White House again in 2011 IMO.
That’s the smart play.
Comrade Kevin
I bet that two years from now, we will be having the same stupid discussion, except then, people will be saying that Obama will need to wait until after his re-election, to keep “distractions” to a minimum.
celticdragon
Yep…we continue to give money and wait with baited breath for the promises that never quite get realized.
You want to know why we are demanding more now, Beltane?
Because we saw the writing on the wall when Obama asked an outright homophobic bigot to be center stage at the inauguration. A man who compared gLBT marriages to beastiality.
Obama had nothing at all to say or help when he was desperately need with prop 8.
He had nothing to offer last night wrt the Maine initiative.
He gives great speeches…and then is AWOL when he is needed in the fight.
Nowhere to be found.
That is why we are suspicious and we are not cutting him slack.
CCCO
Unfortunately, Prez Obama is full of what you call your website…..balloon juice. As commander in chief he is fully capable of temporarily suspending DADT. pause here for a read break: http://www.objector.org/NOV_11__2009.html
The tragedy is that he can appear anywhere at this time in history and blow smoke from piehole without much negative (or positive) consequences. As they say in AA….it’s not what you say, it’s what you do.
As much as i love the brother, Obama does not have the political conjones to “do” what can be done (undone?).
The end of DADT is now in the hands of LGBT troops:
http://www.objector.org/FUK___DADT.html
celticdragon
Maybe because without his help, there is no way it will be passed…
Ann
Where’s the edit function??
My comment was supposed to read:
John — thanks for sharing?!?
But I agree with everything past the first line of your sickbed post.
Emma
I’m of two minds here, because I agree with both John and celticdragon (yes, it often happens; my therapist says it’s ok :D)
What I don’t understand is why he doesn’t just fast-track a bill. There are enough congresscritters willing to do it. That makes me crazy, because it’s almost as if there’s something behind the scenes we’re not privy to. Otherwise why?
And I do agree with celticdragon in this: if I were gay, I would simply shut the purse and tell the Democrats to go away until they get results.
Ann
I’m not LGBT, but I can understand the anger. If women didn’t have voting rights, and the president was asking for more time, I would be rip-shit. As it is, I am rip-shit about his (piece-meal) approach to health care and Wall Street. But I have to deal with it, in the hope/belief that something good will come from this administration. Certainly far better than the alternative (Republican) responses. We live in a political system: e.g power contesting power. Sadly, it ain’t pretty.
Capn America
I love Sully, but it’s funny that when it comes to things that affect him personally he’s all for radical change, but when it comes to bigger questions, he’s always a conservative of doubt. I’m sure if an anti-war blogger asked for an immediate end to the Iraq War, Sully would say it was premature and let’s let the generals do their job. But when it’s gay rights, nooo, we need change RIGHT NOW. Obama will eventually end DADT, there’s no question about that. Will he end the war? Who knows?
CT Voter
Harry Reid can’t simultaneously proclaim “I don’t work for the President” while complaining that he needs guidance from the White House to do something. Therefore, if there’s so much support from Congress for repealing DADT, why isn’t Congress going ahead with it?
parksideq
@celticdragon:
And the public option is supported by at least that many Americans. Look how much that means to the Senate Finance Committee. I’m trying not to come off as antagonizing to you (because I think you have a fair point), but it seems as if your frustration is misdirected.
Other than hold Congress at gunpoint, what more can Obama realistically do to get them on board with his policy agenda (seeing that the GOP is guano loco, and the Blue Dogs aren’t much better) and make them enact it? Speeches like this are one of the tools he can use to persuade (shame?) them into action.
Ash Can
@celticdragon:
Not true. This isn’t the way these things work.
Whenever a president — any president — speaks in public, it’s news by definition, and it gets reported on. Unless he’s utterly clueless (in other words, W), he realizes this and crafts his speech accordingly. He has no choice. Even if he bans reporters from the event, information on his speech will filter out as attendees are questioned by the press.
It’s no small issue in the study of any world leaders to determine to whom the leader in question is speaking when he or she delivers a speech with policy implications. Obama can certainly be counted on to be mindful that he has multiple audiences when he speaks, especially if it’s on a controversial topic.
General Winfield Stuck
@Ann:
Yes.
tballou
Obama deserves every bit of this criticism, and much more for all the other stuff he promised and has either completely backtracked on or ignored. No president in recent history has as strong and as clear a mandate to change a whole lot of stuff; he has squandered this mandate with his inaction, backpedaling, and just plain breaking his many promises.
Tim in SF
I’m pleased with Obama and am patient with the pace of things. However, that is not to say that us gays should let up on pressure for one god damn second. Things are still fairly fucked. We’re still second class citizens. http://tinyurl.com/ykh4c55 Letting up on pressure is the last thing we should do.
And really, I don’t care how we come off – be it as rude or ingrateful or impatient or whiney. I don’t fucking care, John, how you straight people perceive us. We won’t get what we want by making nice. People never do.
Perry Como
I was thinking of a preacher in a unitard, with a curly mustache lifting triangular weights and saying, “BULLY!”
But your idea works too.
Tim in SF
(not that I think this stupid march this weekend is putting pressure on anything other than the grass)
Deschanel
I agree- the speech was a milestone, an historic moment . This slowly dawned on me as I watched it- here is the President of the USA, addressing the gay community with respect, speaking beautifully for 20 minutes of his support. And I do not doubt his sincerity. He acknowledged criticism, and its validity.
What President has ever done such a thing, given such a powerful speech directly to the LGBT community? We truly have come a long way. I’m gay, and I wish people criticizing the speech could see how momentous it really was. I understand the impatience on moving forward, but I keep hearing the same petulance and ire. Speeches might just be words, but they have symbolism, importance when the president speaks. I just wish we could take a moment to appreciate this. No, he didn’t make promises to solve everything at once. But he really is an ally and friend to the gay community. It was a great speech.
“I’m proud to be opening for Lady Gaga..” Lol.
General Winfield Stuck
@Tim in SF:
Fair enough. Politics ain’t beanbags. For all sides.
JGabriel
BDeevDad:
DADT is law? I could be wrong, but I thought that was executive policy, that could be reversed by the President without Congress.
According to this Wikipedia article on DADT, apparently there’s some controversy over that.
.
Mike
…and to tie the last two posts together, the latest post on the Daily Dish reads:
At least Mousavi and Karroubi are eligible.
John Cole
One more time. From 1992-2000, we had DADT and DOMA passed. From 2000-2008, open war was declared on homosexuals through the FMA and all sorts of state level ballot initiatives and other administration actions. From 1992-2008, things were getting worse for gays in this country at a faster and faster rate.
Now, that anti-gay hostility has been, from an official administration standpoint, stopped dead in its tracks. We now have a President who not only is not proposing more anti-gay legislation, as the past two Presidents did, but pledging to end past wrongs and doing so in front of a gay audience for the entire country to see. HE will sign the Matthew Shepard law when it gets to him.
Now if you want to go insane and stop supporting the man who is on your side, more power to you. After you are done with your hissy fit, good luck passing any pro-gay legislation with the 2010 Republican House or in the Palin/Pawlenty administration.
But I understand how cathartic it is to throw things, so have at it.
Brick Oven Bill
Things I just learned about spit:
Phlegm is a subset of mucus, being mucus of the respiratory tract. Mucus is a viscous colloid. Mucus prevents disease in female reproductive organs, and the nature of this mucus changes with the ovulating cycle.
Speaking of gays, semen contains over fifty percent mucus. But this mucus contains fructose, to feed the sperm. Leaving to go watch football, have a nice day.
kommrade reproductive vigor
Fuck Andrew Sullivan in a not at all caring or loving way.
That is all.
parksideq
@John Cole:
THIS. I mean, Obama called Kanye West a jackass and that dominated 2 1/2 days of news. What makes people think that him going out of his way to deliver a speech supporting gay rights (which, not for nothing, he easily could have avoided doing) isn’t:
a) a big deal; and
b) something Congress won’t notice
I personally feel that he brought gay rights back to the forefront. So much attention is being paid to HCR and Iraq/Afghanistan lately, that gay rights kind of fell off the radar (for me anyway, I know I don’t speak for everyone). I hope this helps get the ball rolling on Congress’ repealing of DOMA and DADT.
eemom
Everything is like this. This is just the latest example. Obama is being shit on constantly from all over the left for not doing XYZ soon enough, loud enough, or in the exact way that various “progressives” want it done.
Fucking circular firing squad, again, and I’m sick of it. We are up against pure evil here, people, and if we don’t stop trashing this good man who is only human and dealing with a zillion different disasters every waking minute of the day, evil is going to win, AGAIN.
There’s a lot of talk about how marginalized the republicans are, but it is always stupid to underestimate the enemy, especially when they are so much better than we are at rallying the sheep-like troops. I didn’t think it was possible that Virginia would elect the most primitive Neanderthal ever to be blessed by Pat Robertson to be its governor a mere year after going strongly for Obama and electing its second Democratic senator, but it looks like that’s exactly what’s about to happen.
Corner Stone
@Allan:
She didn’t create a “misimpression”, she said what the WH tolde her to say. Period.
Martin
No kidding:
That’s a pretty blunt statement by the WH Communications staff.
bago
Well, I’m going to the end of the parade. I will report.
MNPundit
No I’m sorry. It’s empty words. Like so many of his other campaign promises he’s done little move on it and actively downplayed any action because it’s not a priority. That’s fine, I can see the POV that the economy or war is more important but don’t act like he’s actually doing anything because he’s not. Symbolism isn’t worth the electrons its broadcast on.
So I guess shorter: Fuck you, apologist.
kommrade reproductive vigor
Sorry, that should be Fuck Andrew Sullivan WITH Brick Oven Bill in a not at all &c.
Ann
“We won’t get what we want by making nice. People never do.”
Tim, I think you are completely right. But it’s one thing to fight this fight within the context of an administration what is open/in agreement with this view, and quite another in one that is openly/politically hostile with this view. Don’t let up on the pressure; and don’t conflate the two kinds of administration.
Ash Can
@Tim in SF: This. And we straights should speak up as well, for the rights of our fellow citizens.
In defense of Celticdragon et al., I can see how the trauma of the last 8 years would make gays and lesbians more impatient for change, as opposed to them feeling more relaxed now that an apparently sympathetic figure is in charge. I’m in agreement with the sentiment that DOMA and DADT should be repealed yesterday if not sooner. However, I can also see how this issue may not have been fully addressed yet for the sole reason that it’s not as big a fire as some of the other conflagrations left burning by the previous admin.
Napoleon
@BB:
I couldn’t have said it better on the underlying issue.
And as to Sullivan its amazing how so many times his position is government shouldn’t do anything/stay out of things until its his pet issue that directly effects him and then it has to get done right now.
Blue Raven
Happy National Coming Out Day. The bitchy queens are out of the closet and screeching about how they don’t feel included because those laws are there only to act all butthurt when they get reminded they aren’t including bisexuals and the transgendered in their pretty bitchfests. Obama did more to remember I exist than most of his critics on this issue set.
So, fuck ’em. I’m with John Cole here. We have a LARGE difference in the White House right now, and I will NOT see that pooh-poohed. Get back to me in four years if all he does is pretty speeches, and then we’ll talk offense and anger.
Corner Stone
@Capn America:
Based on what? Based on what exactly?
CT Voter
@Mike:
No, Mousavi et al aren’t eligible, either, because nominations had to be in in February. Sullivan has identified three individuals who were completely ineligible for the prize.
And he isn’t reading his colleague, Fallows, obviously.
anonevent
@celticdragon: Remember how one of the hardest things that has to be overcome on healthcare is the fact that most people have coverage, so they don’t really need things to change? Now consider how little of population is gay, how few people really know someone who is gay, and how many people in this country – even Democrats – believe that the Bible says that gays are an abomination. It’s going to take 100 times the effort to repeal those laws, and while Obama can do multiple things, Congress can’t.
General Winfield Stuck
Music to me ear.
J in WA
Hear, hear, John!
@celticdragon
Here’s the deal for me:
1. DOMA and DADT affect a small minority of americans;
2. Our crappy health care system affects ALL americans;
3. Congress is a pack of notoriously slow-moving Attention Deficit Disorder morons who can hardly stay on-topic even when there’s only one topic.
Let’s stay focused and get some meaningful reform of the health care system first, and then move on to the smaller issues such as DADT which affected a whopping 619 individuals last year. You’ll get yours. I’m all for it. But if Obama starts pushing hard on it now, we’ll get nothing done on any front, and ~300,000,000 people will continue to suffer under the crappiest health insurance system in the developed world.
And in the meantime, for god’s sake, Sullivan, stop being so goddamn shrill!
MNPundit
Let me also point out that in policies not involving homosexuality, Andrew Sullivan remains supportive of Obama so it’s not like he’s taking his ball and going home or opposing Obama.
But it is my right to laugh in the President’s face when he tells me again how we’re going to fix it but has no action to show for it. Come back to me when you actually have some results, anyone would know enough to stop actively discriminating, why should he be praised for doing something that any decent person would do?
Andy K
@Tim in SF:
Then do more.
As right and righteous as were Gandhi, MLK and their causes, they didn’t sway public opinion by simply coming across as whiny to those who held power. They boycotted, they led sit-ins, they went on strike and they got their asses arrested.
Sure, we like to think that no one would have to use those tactics any longer to achieve equality, but, obviously, we’re wrong.
gwangung
They still have power.
Why do they have power? Because they can call up their army of extreme supporters to wield as a cudgel.
If we aren’t being a cudgel ON THE ISSUE, then we are giving our power away. If we are being a cudgel ON THE PERSON, then we are giving our power away.
And then we’d deserve what we have.
Focus on the issue. Focus on what we want done. Ignore the person.
JGabriel
Brick Oven Bill:
What does it say about BOB that actually Google’d that?
.
Corner Stone
@Perry Como:
Damn you Family Guy!
The Sheriff's A Ni-
If Obama isn’t unilateraly revoking DADT and DOMA and telling everyone opposed ‘Fuck you I’m the deciderer,’ then of couse he’s a failure.
There are those who wanted a Democratic president, and there are those who wanted a progressive Bush. You can easily tell who’s who.
MNPundit
@The Sheriff’s A Ni-: Well considering the objective ability of the Congress… do you REALLY want them to have the power to govern?
Scrooge McDuck
celticdragon sounds somewhat typical of the one-issue voter: “I want my issue on the top of the political agenda, and anyone else can go fuck themselves.” As such, I think he (or she) is as big an enemy of the gay community as Jerry Falwell ever was.
I believe that Obama is the most skilled politician since Roosevelt, with an acute sense the the “possible,” and an agenda more ambitious and nuanced than most are giving him credit for. He is working towards a political realignment; taking a political mandate that was temporary and conditional, and building the cultural and political infrastructure to disarm the loony right for a generation. And perhaps–just perhaps–reigniting the culture wars because blog warriors like celticdragon cannot wait for largely symbolic–but politically costly–changes will make that larger task become impossible.
Give the man a chance–and a break. If you didn’t hear unalloyed commitment in his speech to the HRC, you simply weren’t listening.
The Sheriff's A Ni-
@gwangung: +1
James
But Obama DID encourage the LGBT community to keep up the pressure, not only on him but on Congress, until it gets done. He DID acknowledge that it wasn’t for him to tell the community to wait. So I thought it was a great speech, but the community does need to keep up the pressure.
Yes, Booooosh was worse, and there was literally NO chance at change during his administration. And Clinton acknowledged coming late to his enlightenment. But applying hard pressure is the only way to effect change. Obama said as much last night. I think he’s trying to move the ship in the right direction, but he can’t do it alone. Let’s see where it goes after HCR passes.
adolphus
Is it possible to agree with both John and Sullivan?
I too want to give Obama some time to work out some of these issues and I think last night was a historic speech. But on the other hand, while Obama is new, the Democratic establishment has been stringing along the LGBT community for decades with little substantive to show for it and pundits, activists, and others in this community should not let up on the president or other politicians for a second. How do you ask someone to stay in the back of the bus until 2016, (don’t worry, just 7 more years and you can use the front door) which is what the HRC mass email asked them to do. When one Facebook post about “death panels” by Pallin can successfully remove end of life counseling from the Health Care debate how do I ask those on the other side to stay quiet?
I, too think we should give the president more time to work on this and last night was a huge step forward. But then I can marry anyone I want in all 50 states, can join the military and not hide who I am, can stay by the deathbed of my wife (GSD forbid), can’t be fired for who I love, and I can walk down the streets of my deep south, red state town without verbal assault or fear of physical violence. Who am I to ask those that can’t, and never could, to wait 7 more years to see results?
Way to go Obama, but keep up the pressure Sullivan, is what I say.
The Sheriff's A Ni-
@MNPundit: @MNPundit: You want a black Bush. Got it.
4tehlulz
Has it occurred to anyone to ask if a DADT or DOMA repeal would actually pass?
I haven’t seen any indication that it would, or that the vote would be close, for that matter.
The Other Steve
It would have been better if we elected John McCain.
Ash
I think we’re more likely to witness the discovery of flying unicorns before that ever happens.
Cerberus
Perspectively, I’ve been disappointed in his muted at best approach to gay rights, but I agree with Pam Spaulding about something very important he did.
He didn’t echo our “leaders” in telling us to wait, he basically said “make me change this shit”. I appreciate that.
And I think the whole affair was sort of neutral to me, but highly negative for our national leaders. I suspect the popular revolt of the gay people in the street against the groups that purport to stand for them is not far off if it hasn’t already happened (a lot of the groups pushing for things have been new orgs or regional groups separated from the national groups or random people like the Boies lawsuit).
So Obama on gay rights…meh, HRC on gay rights…fuck you.
Ash
@The Other Steve: Meghan McCain LURVES THE GAYS!
BDeevDad
@JGabriel: See
(1) Section 654 of title 10, United States Code.
(2) Subsections (b), (c), and (d) of section 571 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (10 U.S.C. 654 note).
Joe M
I love this blog but I have a genuine problem with someone who is straight telling gay people to relax regarding DADT and DOM. We just don’t have the luxury of waiting. Sully is a self-righteous tool sometimes and definitely does not speak for the gay community, but honestly John. What we are asking for is so simple and quite small. I would rather not be lectured.
gwangung
@adolphus:
Yes.
But remember, that wingnutters are organizing on both the local and national level to repeal gay rights. In Maine and Washington, at least, they’re very very active in blocking or ending them.
If we’re just sitting on our butts, whining about how Democratic leaders are betraying us, well, all I can say is look in the mirror. The wingnuts can bring up a big stick of 70 million voters to oppose the repeal of DADT and DOMA. If we aren’t getting a cudgel of 140 million voters together, if we’re just waiting for leaders to do it alone, then it’s not going to get done.
General Winfield Stuck
@Ash:
I thought I saw one the other day, but turned out to be Sarah on her Moose.
Corner Stone
@Cerberus:
“Make me do it.”…”Make me change it.”
Bullshit. If pressure from popular decisions had any real weight then we wouldn’t be where we are today.
How many are for single payer? How many for a PO?
How many against DADT?
“Make me” is a bullshit cop out excuse. It puts the agency on a nebulous “other” that can never be quantified, even though an overwhelming majority of people are for it!
“Well, my admin would’ve done that if only we had known the strength of support out there for it amongst the American people. But we didn’t think we had support from a broad spectrum.”
It sets up a perfect evade and excuse scenario.
Ash
@BDeevDad: Thanks for that, I’ve never actually read it.
BWAHAHAHA. But criminals and people with mental instabilities are totally cool.
Joe M
@4tehlulz: So why bother even trying, right? Tedious.
Ann
Re: John Cole at response 39 (obviously I don’t know the ins and outs of this website!!):
I think it is hard for straight white men to understand how painful discrimination can be. As a white woman myself, I know that it can make you crazy. I guess the point I want to make is that, while I agree with you, John, I have experienced how thin the line is between throwing (justified) stones and being “rational”.
Dinah
I’m just getting over an ailment much like yours. I was cranky, you are probably cranky, but here’s the thing: Often it takes a cranky spell to override being “nice.” Sullivan’s tenure at New Republic showed for all to see that he doesn’t have any judgment.
It is absolutely true that gays are treated unjustly and should keep up the pressure. If President Obama does not take up the matter of gays in the military and does not make a push to get rid of DOMA, I will be terribly disappointed, but give him a break. He took over a huge mess that threatened to destabilize the whole world.
Since some of the commenters are giving their orientation, I will say that I always considered myself a straight woman, but then I never ran into a Rachel Maddow.
Just Some Fuckhead
Don’t forget Human Rights Campaign and a fuckton of ghey people supported Hillary Clinton’s bid for president, despite the Clintons being responsible for DADT and DOMA.
I’d like it if they would all sit down and shut the fuck up.
kommrade reproductive vigor
Man, I hope the GOP tries to take advantage of this. Or maybe not. I nearly died laughing a few times when they informed me the Democrats took my black ass for granted. Concern trolling from the fReichtards re: gay rights might be fatal.
Noo! We must continue to pound away on our keyboards about what big sads we haz. But never, ever, you know write our Congress Critters or the President.
Really. African-Americans, women. They got their rights by pouting.
4tehlulz
@Joe M: Fuck you. Nothing would make the homophobes happier than a DADT repeal going down in flames. But you got your vote so that’s all that counts right?
Just Some Fuckhead
@JGabriel:
That he cares about what goes into his body?
Mario Piperni
Agree with John on this one. Obama’s been in office for 9 months now for crying out loud. Is it all supposed to get done within a year? The economy, health care, end the wars, etc.
I’m taking the President at his word on gay rights. It’ll get done. Full story and illustration.
gnomedad
@Corner Stone:
Based on repeatedly and publicly saying that he will end it. It’s lose-lose for him if he fails; i.e., gays and the left will pissed for the failure and right will be pissed for him promising to do it. Although they will be pissed in any case, of course.
Jay C
@John Cole:
What John said: The problem in this country isn’t with that 60% of the pollees who said they wanted DADT repealed; it’s with the other 40% – the bulk of whom, it is likely, would not only favor keeping DADT, but probably also absolutely recriminalized homosexuality – or even making mention of it public – on the local/state/Federal level; preferably as a capital offense.
If the Wingnut Wurlitzer (which, however has managed to get the hooples so riled up over Obama’s healthcare-reform proposals threatening their “freedoms”*, imagine the sh*tstorm that will ensue when they get
toldscreamed at that it’s their religion/social mores/manhood “under attack”.That doesn’t make it right, of course, but in the matter of gay rights, the opposition (however bigoted or misguided we might think it is) can’t simply be disregarded. It’s no wonder that a politician as intelligent as Barack Obama is not going to jump out ahead of the trend and risk too much political capital – capital he has other “projects” to spend on at the moment.
But again, what John said: do advocates for gay rights want a President who is at least sympathic to their aims (and who, as JC points out WILL sign on to reforms), or some Republican who will be actively hostile to them?
*the “freedom” mainly, ISTM, to be ripped off by big insurance companies, but there it is…
Brandon
Lets see, when the LGBT community had the actual chance to do something tangible, such as protect marriage rights in CA, they sat on the sidelines. However, the fact that they are not getting enough attention from Obama is a problem? Man, I just don’t get it. A reality check is indeed needed.
Comrade Kevin
@kommrade reproductive vigor:
Are you trying to be stupid, or does it come naturally to you? What makes you think that gays are just sitting around pouting?
Idiot.
kth
Exactly the same situation black folks were in around 1962. Just because a guy who is relatively sympathetic to your cause is in the driver’s seat does not mean you stop raising hell until you get what is yours: equality.
Joe M
@Andy K: Hey, you know what, Andy K? YOU DO MORE. I don’t know where you’ve been the past 20 years, but between AIDS, DADT, DOMA, endless referendums, whole religions calling us pedophiles, etc, we’ve done plenty. How about straight people speak up against this shit instead of tsk tsking the gays like we’re hyper children at a big boy party. Christ, I’d rather have some fundie call me a pervert than have my allies roll their fucking eyes at me. I’ll have to live with your disappointment.
Joe M
@Brandon: You are profoundly ignorant on what happened in CA, as well as how most gay people handle the day to day task of combating discrimination. And I cannot help you.
kommrade reproductive vigor
Gee, I don’t know. The comments on blog, perhaps? I’ve been hearing this conversation since I was in college and as we get MORE pols who might be willing to stop being such assholes, people are LESS willing to do jack shit.
Given the history of every other civil rights movement, how does that even make sense?
burnspbesq
@Tim in SF:
Fair enough, but you don’t improve your chances of getting what you want by gratuitously insulting and antagonizing people who are on your side.
Joe M
@Comrade Kevin: Well, I don’t know about you, Kevin – but that’s how I fight for gay equality. I just post messages on internet boards followed by a frowny emoticon like so – :(. Nothing else, though.
robertdsc
Patrick Murphy (IIRC, it’s a long day for me, can’t remember exactly) the sponsor of a bill in the House to repeal DADT has gone on record as saying that people in some contested districts have told him that votes for repeal are difficult to come by. They’d love to support him, but would get shit back home for it.
Kirsten Gillibrand has made a call for DADT repeal on the Senate side, but I can’t remember if she’s gone on record as Murphy has.
As for myself, I’ve stuck my foot in my mouth too much against the President and been shown to be wrong, so I have no idea. I’m taking it day by day. I’ll celebrate when both acts are repealed, though.
adolphus
@gwangung: Point taken. So I guess I would say I agree with both John and Sully on this, with a heaping helping of get off your butt and do something about it. Like the protest in DC that is happening right now.
More of all three please.
Wile E. Quixote
@Allan
I did the same thing and also got rid of my cable subscription. It’s amazing. The only I’m exposed to CNN/Faux nonsense is at the gym, where the rage it induces serves as a useful spur for my workouts.
bago
Apparently DC is SO image based that Boeing literally takes out ads on the Metro just stating “Boeing. We make great tankers”. Seriously, they think that is ad money well spent. A single sentence on a wall.
So the image of a mass of people rallying for their rights will probably have an effect.
That being said, I’m headed out soon to go be a part of that mass.
celticdragon
Damned straight. The last thing I need is to be lectured by John Cole.
Warren Terra
What’s that FDR quote about “I agree with you now go out there and make me do it”? Obama and Gates may be making DADT repeal possible, but it’s still important to pressure him – but not demonize him.
JoeCHI
You’re obviously sick from ingesting too much Obot Kool-Aid.
cyd
@Allan:
On issues that require legislative approval, they can’t do that because Congress acts as a bottleneck. On issue that don’t require legislative approval, I think you’ll be surprised how many policy changes have already been slipped under the radar.
smiley
@Ann:
Ann, see the little gray arrow next to the time stamp of comments? Click on that in your comment to link to the comment you’re responding to.
J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford
@Just Some Fuckhead:
Apparently BOB is getting serious about his diet and is now counting calories.
bodacious
Actually, a point Sully bitched about, ‘why didn’t Obama even mention legislation in Washington and Maine’ was where I think Andrew veered off course. Obama referenced before he was elected that he respected state’s rights in gun control issues, and I think that should be consistent respect on all issues. He has an influential role in DADT for sure, and DOMA as well, but I don’t pine for the day that the POTUS sticks his nose into state right’s issues at will. I’m in Washington, and I will work against the current challenge of domestic partnership equality, but I can see this as a future hornets nest if a not-so-friendly president starts poking around in state sovereignty.
burnspbesq
@celticdragon:
Actually, you do need a friendly reminder from somebody about the fundamentals of electoral arithmetic.
There aren’t enough gays in any jurisdiction in the United States (including the City and County of San Francisco) for y’all to make anything happen all by yourselves. You need the support of straight people who understand and agree that your causes are just, or you are nowhere.
You can tell me to fuck off and I’ll still do the right thing, because that’s the way I am. Not everyone is like that. When you tell some people to fuck off, they will tell you to fuck off right back, and then you’ve lost a supporter that you absolutely need.
Steeplejack
@bago:
You’re not from around here, are you, hon?
All along the Metro Blue Line, which runs past the Pentagon and Pentagon City, you see ads like the one you mentioned, where defense contractors do “edgy” consumer-style ads to keep their name in front of the military-industrial-complex commuters.
At least I don’t think they’re hoping that me and the Georgetown grad student sitting next to me will pool our money and buy a Boner 9000 surface-to-air missile. Hmm . . .
Corner Stone
@gnomedad:
Hmmm…ISTM that it is pretty clear to this point that Obama has used the Left as a handy foil at every opportunity. It’s almost as if kicking them in the balls serves some kind of purpose for his agenda or something!
Corner Stone
@kth:
No, no, no. Other things. Other things are going on. We’re going to get there. We are *totally* going to get there.
But not right now. Other things. Other things are going on and we promise you through repeated rhetoric that we’ll get there.
*Totally*.
wrb
@celticdragon:
I’ve long been puzzled why gay activists choose to lead with open service in the military
and marriage.
They are the issues that I, at least, have trouble seeing as unambiguously matters of civil rights. Politicians who help with them are, as a result, perhaps more likely to be punished by the voters than if they were to help with matters of violence or domestic workplace discrimination.
The military issue involves non-trivial management difficulties. Just adding women to an environmental research project I was on introduced amazing complications. It was in the 70’s and it had been men only operated for years, but the stipulations attached to funding changed. Pretty much the pulsing fog of desire and sexual competition swamped decision making. Our equivalent of operational efficienceywas reduced. People became significantly less tuned to nature and the work. And what did you do if you needed to send 2 people to a remote camp? The project operated over thousands of square miles of miles of wilderness. Do you send a man and a woman knowing that you may be setting up harassment or rape? In that case we could just segregate. Send two men or two women. But mixing in gays makes that solution impossible.
I’m not saying that gays shouldn’t be able to serve in the military openly, just that those that think that making it work won’t be difficult and that there isn’t need to create consensus as to how to do it are likely naive.
The marriage goal, if achieved, can look like something that will lead to further discrimination against us to those of us who are unmarried. Married couples get many financial benefits, justified by the hardships and expense of gestation, birth and child rearing, together with society’s interest in the well being of children.
I can kinda go along with that for reasons similar to the ones that cause me to be willing to pay for public education even though I don’t have kids.
But adding couples who are unlikely to have kids to this privileged class looks like something that will creation of a block that will allocate more and more resources to itself while wanking on about the specialness of marriage and how the condition itself justifies better access to the trough.
These two goals of the gay community are like nitro the right. They seem great for getting democrats thrown out of office and so preventing the accomplishment other gay and progressive but goals.
But I don’t know. That’s just how it looks to me from the outside looking in.
Corner Stone
@Joe M:
Personally, ISTM that not only are you objectively pro-pedophilia, but it’s clear you are also pro-beastiality.
That’s what an R – TX congressmen said the other day in session, so it has to be true. Corpses too, I believe.
Corner Stone
@celticdragon:
Actually, I would consider this a good sign. The dude’s been wrong about every major issue to this country for so long that if he’s now calling out the GLBT movement it must mean they are close to achieving something pretty spectacular.
Corner Stone
@Warren Terra: IOW – get in line behind the banksters, the lobbyists, et al and wait your turn.
Corner Stone
@burnspbesq:
How many blacks were there as a percentage of population in the ’60’s?
You can’t tell me the population overall supported equal rights on a larger percentage majority than anti-DADT does now.
Ben JB
There’s this awfully strange dynamic I’ve noticed–something like Freud’s “narcissism of small difference”–where people leading the pack on some issue (here, Sully on equal rights for GLBT) turn on the part of the pack that’s closest. It seems counter-productive–but let’s be clear here, that doesn’t mean it’s wrong to put pressure on Obama, it’s just wrong to apply the wrong pressure in the wrong places. If you’re unhappy with Obama’s approaches to gay policy, you’re looking to bend him, not break him.
Frankly, I don’t think that “putting pressure on Obama” and “supporting Obama” are mutually exclusive, as it seems that some here do. Sully is actually a good model of someone who doesn’t fall into this camp: he’s annoyed over Obama’s gay policy and supportive of many other of Obama’s policies. (Though Capn America at #27 has a great thought about that.)
I’d go even further: clearly Obama’s promises need to be acted on (though, again, 9 months in after 8 years of the Global War on Gay, I’m prepared to be patient), but he’s also clearly the best option here on gay rights. I would think that the GLBT community could be both righteously pissed that more hasn’t happened for these causes and happy that they have someone as generally liked as Obama is in America to stand up for their causes.
Wile E. Quixote
@celticdragon
Wow. Ghey wingnuts. Awesome. Jesus you’re ignorant. I mean your ignorance is awesome, it’s on par with the ignorance, stupidity of any teabagger on the street. Congratulations. You don’t think Obama has any guts. Are you like a ghey PUMA or something. I’m curious because I listened to the speech and thought that it was pretty ballsy, especially this line.
That’s a ballsy thing to say, there are a bunch of people who get really pissed off if you try to compare the African American civil rights movement with GLBT issues. Black people, but Barack Obama was willing to go there. But tell me, what other politician has ever made a speech like this? Bill Clinton sure as Hell didn’t. He caved on DADT and bragged to white Christian southerners about signing DoMA into law. Hillary Clinton sure as Hell wouldn’t have, she was as much of a triangulator as Bill was. HRC would have taken your money, given it to HRC and if she had been elected she would have dropped the LGBT community like a used condom. And let’s not even start on John McCain and Caribou Barbie, we all dodged that bullet.
Jesus H. Christ, you have a president of the United States making a speech where he invokes the memory of the Stonewall riots. A president of the United States who actually mentions transgendered people and doesn’t just sweep them under the rug because some people think they’re weird and icky. A black president who is willing to make the comparison between the black civil rights movement and the LGBT civil rights movement and a president who repeatedly said to the audience that they needed to hold him and other leaders accountable if they’re not doing enough.
You have all of this and you’re still pissy because what, because President Obama hasn’t waved the magic tinkle wand and guaranteed LGBT equality? Hey, remind us all again how well things worked out in San Francisco when Gavin Newhouse decided to legalize gay marriage by executive fiat. It was a neat political stunt and that’s it. Are you pissy because President Obama hasn’t had Fred Phelps crucified on the White House lawn? Because he hasn’t issued an executive order overturning DADT and DoMA and executed everyone who disagrees with him on this issue? He’s the President of the United States, not a dictator, and unlike the last occupant of the office he’s actually staying within the framework of the law and acting like the president and not a dictator.
What you really want a liberal version of George W. Bush who will use the same illegal and unconstitutional tactics that Bush did to push a liberal agenda. What you believe is that the Bush administration’s ends didn’t justify all of the nifty, unconstitutional and illegal means that Ashcroft, Gonzales, Yoo and the rest of the unitary executive braintrust dreamed up but that the Obama administration’s ends would justify those means. I don’t. I want someone who obeys the law and who doesn’t feel that they get to do anything they like because they’re PoTUS.
Now you bitch and whine and say that he isn’t doing enough. Well what are you doing about Congress? Anything, or are you just bitching and whining? Because the ball’s in their court, they’re the ones who need to repeal DADT, they’re the ones who need to repeal DoMA. What are you doing about asshole politicians like Patty Murray, (D, Washington) and Harry Reid (D, (invertebrate) Nevada) who voted for DoMA in 1996 to shore up their bigot cred and who are up for reelection in 2010? Or the other Senate Democrats, Reid, Rockefeller, Conrad, Dorgan, Leahy, Dodd, Lieberman, Specter (those last two being DINOs) who voted for DoMA. Are you just letting them off the hook and whining about Obama because whining about Obama is easy but doing something about bigoted Senate Democrats like Murray and Reid and the rest of them is hard?
Maus
No, fuck him for that. He’s still at his very core a shrill conservative shill.
Wile E. Quixote
@celticdragon
It’s “bated” breath ya moran. Get it right.
That goddamned Obama, what a dickhead. I mean here he is running for president of the United States as a black man with a Muslim sounding name and he didn’t take time out of his schedule, which he should have because running for president is really easy, even if you’re a black guy named “Barack Hussein Obama” to fly out to California and take over the “No on 8” campaign. What a selfish bastard.
Of course the fact that the No on 8 campaign was run by a gaggle of completely incompetent morons who pissed away every opportunity they had, paid themselves comfortably large salaries and failed to use a letter from Barack Obama condemning Proposition 8 is completely irrelevant. No, no, no, Obama should have flown out to California, because he had so much time on his hands while running for President (as a black guy with a Muslim sounding name), taken charge of No on 8 and insured that Proposition 8 was defeated in November, presidential campaign be damned.
Oh, here’s the text of the letter that Obama wrote to the Alice B. Toklas Club. The letter that the folks at No on 8 didn’t see fit to use.
That selfish, gutless bastard! Damn him!
TenguPhule
I never help but think that the loudest proponents of the LGBT movement are often their own worst enemy.
Fuck, how about putting that outrage to good use and getting some attention and pressure on the people who actually make the laws, Congress!
And while you’re at it, stop acting like goddamn fucking idiots and MAKE ALLIES WITH OTHER PEOPLE WITH PROGRESSIVE AGENDAS!!!
Help with HCR and rack up some favors owed from the folks who want the public option. Chase down that fucker Bush and make his Texas ranch a news media spectacle until the admin has no other choice but to finally bring him and his cronies in for trials.
Help out instead of expecting someone else to do everything for you!
Leelee for Obama
What was is that Congressman Grayson said t’other day? If Obama had a BLT for lunch, they’d move to ban bacon?
In my entire 58 years, I’ve never heard a President more supportive of GLBT rights and while I’m aware that NOW would be better, SOON ain’t bad. As a female who’s Grandmothers didn’t get the right to vote until 1920, following 50 or 60 years of fighting for that right, I think the light at the end of the tunnel is visible as never before-pissing on Obama’s shoes about this is just giving dim bulbs like the one I caught on MSNBC today from Log Cabin Republicans. Dude thinks there are moderate Repubs just waiting to pass the repeal after they take back the House in 2010. It’s be funny if it didn’t show how delusional he is.
Leelee for Obama
No edit for me! hope you read typese.
Sanka
Here! Here!
By the same token, the current President should be denigrated and criticized for his cruel mistreatment of basket-weavers. It’s been 8 months and he has YET to name any prominent basket-weavers to any post in his administration!
Bastards…
Brandon
@Joe M
If anyone wants to provide a proper argument for how the LGBT community did not screw up the Prop. 8 campaign, I am all ears. But from my vantage point, they were out fundraised and out maneuvered. Please someone, tell me I am wrong and I’ll listen. However I think @Wile E. Quixote has already laid out a strong argument that would be difficult for you to surmount.
The point being, that was an actual tangible and important thing they could have done and didn’t get the job done in arguably one of the most liberal states in the union. Currently, there is a campaign going on in ME and it would seem to me that the LGBT community should be directing all of their energy towards that end first.
Is it wrong for me to point out how folks are getting it wrong both on tactics and on substance?
J in WA
@Wile E. Quixote:
You’re misrepresenting Patty Murray. Yes, she voted for DoMA, but has since expressed regret for that vote. Additionally, she:
– voted NO on a constitutional ban of same-sex marriage;
– voted YES on adding sexual orientation to the definition of hate crimes;
– voted YES on prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation;
– cosponsored a bill to provide benefits to same-sex domestic partners of federal employees; and
– scores 100% on HRC’s measure of support for gay rights.
She made a bad vote, years ago. So what? People make mistakes, and they change their minds. She has now publicly regretted that vote, and has worked to right the wrong. Give her a break.
bago
[email protected]Steeplejack:I have only been in town about 20 hours.
Wile E. Quixote
@J in WA
No I’m not. Patty Murray voted for DoMA in 1996 to shore up her cred with bigots. Back then she wasn’t doing all that well, The Progressive had printed an article featuring her as one of the ten dumbest members of Congress, The Progressive mind you. Not National Review or the Weekly Standard. The Progressive. Murray has since supported LGBT issues not out of any deep conviction on her part, but because Washington state politics are so polarized that it doesn’t matter how she votes on these issues, the Craswell Republicans still run the show here and they’re not going to vote for a Democrat regardless of how homophobic she is, whereas being a homophobe will cost her support with her liberal Seattle base.
Patty Murray was elected because Brock Adams fucked up and has kept her job because every Republican candidate she’s ever faced has been too insane for Washington voters. She’s a half-bright, opportunistic hack in tennis shoes, as witness the way she carries water for the Blethen family on the issue of inheritance taxes. God forbid that she face the sclerotic wrath of the editorial board of a dying family newspaper.
Brandon
@Wile E. Quixote
I was actually a student at WWU when Murray cast her vote and I can tell you from personal knowledge that she knew exactly what she was doing and did it anyway. At the time, she had come to campus with her daughter for a visit (her daughter ended up attending the following year) and gave a talk. About 50 students showed up. And at the time, the majority of students were asking questions about the environmental issues of the day like the “salvage rider” and the Endangered Species Act. However she was directly confronted during that session on DOMA and gave what I remember as a lame ass defense to the tune of “well I disagree with it personally, but you kids just don’t understand politics”. It caused a massive groan from everyone there and left me with the impression that she is both pathetic and gutless. 15 odd years later and she has yet to do anything to change that.
Andy K
@Joe M:
My point is that you’ll be getting both the eye-rolling from your allies and the ad hominem attacks from the fundies for decades to come until you realize that simply asking to be allowed your equal rights isn’t getting the job done. You are banging your collective head against the wall in order to break down that wall, and you have barely made a dent. It’s time to try some other tactics. That would at least stop the eye-rolling from your allies.
J in WA
@Wile E. Quixote
I dunno, WEQ, you primarily seem to be accusing Murray of being a cynical, opportunistic politician. I’m not arguing with you there — politicians are cynical and shallow practically by definition. But you are misrepresenting her by trying to paint her as anti-LGBT and implying that voting her out of office would necessarily be in celticdragon et al.’s interests. On the LGBT issues, she’s made one vote that is contrary to their interests (DoMA), but many more directly supporting them. Votes are the only thing that matter — not intention, and not whatever evil demons you think that you see in her. So what if she’s playing to her base. Show me a senator who isn’t. She’s still voting overwhelmingly in favor of LGBT issues.
Your inheritance tax beef is completely beside the point. Is that what you’re suggesting to celticdragon? “Look, this Murray character is supporting crappy tax policy, so in order to get your LGBT agenda to the forefront of the national dialogue, you need to get off your ass and vote her out of office.”
Dunno, doesn’t sound too compelling to me.
Ann
@smiley: Thanks!
tenkindsagrumpy
I’m w/Scrooge McD on this, and Celtic D. et al, you don’t know jack shit about politics, or persuasion. I suggest,, No, demand, that you brush up on the politics, presidency, and polemics of Abraham Lincoln, then come back and tell me he was all just rhetoric.
NobodySpecial
You know, I think all the people who are encouraging the gays to ‘wait’ on this issue should go read King’s Letter From a Birmingham Jail.
And yeah, someone will get offended by that suggestion, but they should hold off on sounding off about it, because I have some really important issues on the front burner right now.
Neil H
@Brandon:
The No on 8 sideraised more money than the Yes side. The way it was run was abysmal, but I don’t think that’s the fault of the “LGBT community” in general.
The LGBT community hates the way the No on 8 campaign was run. The whole Join the Impact group started in part because of the perception that there was no-one effectively representing the interests of the LGBT community.
I think a lot of the frustration people see among gay people here is stemming from the fact that the LGBT community feels like the people currently running our campaigns and lobbying our political representatives aren’t actually doing very much for our community at all. They’re too timid, or too willing to take the answer “just wait your turn” that’s being given by the Democratic party for literally decades
(And I’m sorry that Obama is getting the brunt of blame for something that’s been occurring long before he was even a Senator and for which he has not been responsible for, but as the de facto head of the Democratic party, people are going to look to him to try and change the way the Democratic party approaches these issues).
Bottom line, I think Obama’s unfortunately copping flak for an argument going on within the LGBT community about the whole way they approach their own issues and the way they relate to the Democrats generally. Funnily enough, I also think this is a good thing, because I believe it’s a result of the LGBT community’s overall success: gay rights in the US are now in a better position than they have ever, ever been, and the timid tactics of the past need to be updated to reflect the new reality. It’s just up to the LGBT community to convince their lobbying organisations and the Democrats that this is the case.
Um, I was supposed to answer a question here wasn’t I? Think I got a bit off track there…
J in WA
@NobodySpecial:138
Shorter NobodySpecial:
Shut your face about this, because I’m busy.
J in WA
Apparently blank lines kill the blockquote. BalloonJuice really needs a new blogging engine.
Chicago_Enn
Hey, gay guy here. Just wanted to say I think this post is completely on the mark. And I love the remark about the bully pulpit.
Also, best way to get over a nasty cold is Vicks on the feet. Nasty but it works, I swear.
Steeplejack
@bago:
Yeah, I know. I was joking.
bob h
The gays probaby just have to wait until Obama’s political capital is high enough for him to do it. Probably after HCR..
Has the world gone mad?
@kth: Not even close. It took over 400 years for blacks to come even close to where we are today.
Complaining gets you no where. You have to personally get involved. You have to get in the trenches. Not just point to one man and gripe that he isn’t working fast enough.
Oh, and another thing blacks are still struggling.
Family receives KKK card. and that was in 2009
Has the world gone mad?
@Wile E. Quixote: stop making sense.
Has the world gone mad?
@Sanka: lolol