Dan Savage on Obama’s “for it before he was against it” position on gay marriage:
Before I risk publicly disagreeing with “some strategists” let me say with this: I think the president should come out in support of marriage equality. I think everyone should. And I believe Obama supported marriage equality in 1996, and I think he supports it now. But I also believe that Barack Obama will pay a political price—a potentially determinative price—if he endorses marriage equality before the 2012 election. Because Republicans who support marriage equality aren’t going to vote for Barack Obama in 2012 just because he came out for marriage equality. But Democrats who don’t support marriage equality are likely to vote againstObama if he does.
Obama’s team, I expect, realizes this (they’re probably polling it as I type), and their mission is to get the president reelected. Our mission is to secure our full civil equality and I don’t see how a Romney/Bachmann administration gets us closer to that goal. The country is moving our way, time is on our side, and I expect that Obama’s kabuki evolution will pick up a serious head of steam sometime in January of 2013. Who knows? The president could wind up evolving all the way back to 1996.
But there will be no evolutionary leaps between now and November of 2012.
The whole thing is worth a read, because it’s an example of how to be a solid advocate for your position without losing sight of political reality. I’ll just add that letting a Republican get anywhere near a Supreme Court appointment in the next few years would be devastating. Imagine another Thomas or Scalia replacing Ginsberg.
Dave
Haven’t you heard? Obama and McCain/Romney/Bush are exactly alike. So unless we get President Kucinich in 2012, we’re all doomed anyway.
jibeaux
Dan Savage is the pragmatic bomb. I have heard that some years ago, he would single out and light into Nader voters after bullying them into outing themselves. I heart him.
Zifnab
I just don’t know if this is true. First off, there are lots of mushy-middle independents that have pet issues and would happily mobilize around a President that openly supports gay marriage. Second off, I think the lines in the sand between Democrats and Republicans are drawn pretty sharply. I just don’t think we’re going to see a lot of party switching in ’12. Marriage equality isn’t going to be a lead issue because it A) polls too well for Republicans to make a stink out of and B) isn’t an immediate concern like the wars or the economy.
I don’t think Obama helps himself tremendously by stating support for marriage equality. But I don’t think he hurts himself either. Hiding on this issue isn’t a sign of political calculus. It’s a sign of political cowardice. And it’s a sign Obama has been willing to hold up on entirely too many occasions.
I don’t like this at all.
Just Some Fuckhead
Why would Obama come out in support of gay marriage when he’s clearly on the record opposing it?
I guess at this point no sentient American thinks he has any principles.
JCT
This. I just have no understanding whatsoever of how electing anyone from the now completely insane Republican party furthers any identifiable progressive goal.
Not one.
4tehlulz
Dan Savage is a Obot sellout.
geg6
I like Dan Savage and I like that he is not a manic progressive. For myself, I can’t imagine a reason we should stop gays from marrying, any more than we should stop anyone from getting married. And I have to say that even some of my more homophobic friends and acquaintances agree with me on that. It’s only the religious fanatic types that I know who are so closed minded and stupid about this. But then, they are closed minded and stupid about everything, even their own religion, that I find it shocking that anyone, even politicians, take those idiots seriously about anything.
Just Some Fuckhead
Joe Lieberman is with us on everything except the war.
Tim, Interrupted
blah blah blah…Savage has for some years been a firmly ensconced member of the Gay Establishment. Of course he’s pushing Obama now.
Let us not forget that Danny is great and good friends with Sully; they all hang out together at Sully’s Gay Married vacation home in P Town each summer, don’t ya know.
Yes, definitely, conservative, timid political tea leaf reading is obviously the way to go; God forbid a president would use his position and influence and access to the media to, you know, ADVOCATE, or LEAD, or possibly TEACH, INFORM, EDUCATE the public to a new way of seeing things…no, much better to hang back and…be a douche tool of the Reagan Republican philosophy in general.
Assholes.
amk
@ Tim, Interrupted
Are you talking about choi and aravois ?
Suffern ACE
@Zinfarb – but it doesn’t poll well in certain states that Obama won last time and would probably need to win again this time.
jonas
This is absolutely right, except that there’s a good chance of the Senate flipping or going 50/50 in 2012 unless there’s some massive pro-Democrat avalanche coming that we can’t see. That means that if Obama gets to nominate another Supreme Court justice, he/she *will* get the shit filibustered out of them if they’re not right of center. So we *are* going to end up with a 5-4 right wing court in the next few years. I don’t think Obama will name another Scalia or Thomas, but we just may end up with another Kennedy and then it will all be over.
Felinious Wench
Becuase it’s early in the morning for me, and I think a little Kinky tends to liven up the place…some choice quotes from Mr. Friedman on this topic, and some other’s we’ve flung around lately…
I support gay marriage. I believe they have a right to be as miserable as the rest of us.
I have a better head of hair than Rick Perry; it’s just not in a place I can show you.
We’ve got to clear some of the room out of the prisons so we can put the bad guys in there, like the pedophiles and the politicians.
Well, I just said that Jesus and I were both Jewish and that neither of us ever had a job, we never had a home, we never married and we traveled around the countryside irritating people.
Ya’ll have a good day.
Hal
Wow. Some of you really don’t know anything about Savage. He’s as far from an Obama booster as you can get, and has had absolutely no issue in criticizing Obama on gay rights every chance he gets. This is the nicest he’s been to Obama on this issue in long time.
General Stuck
Yes, but what about Obama’s ILLEGAL WAR in Libya? Just like Bush and Yoo. Let’s talk some more high brow progressivity for the cause, and why maybe should Obama face impeachment for his ILLEGAL WAR in Libya. Did I mention [[[ILLEGAL, JUST LIKE BUSH, OR MAYBE EVEN WORERER]]]
Whiskey Screams from a Guy With No Short-Term Memory
I do every day. I wish Ginsburg would retire after this current term. The long-term survival rate for what she has is non-existent and I’m not willing to bet the farm that Obama gets another term. I think it’s likely – but see no point in taking those kind of risks.
boss bitch
@Hal:
I think the first one is sarcasm. second one maybe. I think we all know what Savage thinks of Obama. At least I do. I believe he was the one blaming Obama for the first fail on DADT because Obama was on the phone congratulating some women’s team on their win instead of calling for votes. Total bullshit of course.
Zifnab
@Suffern ACE – That only matters if you think marriage equality is the kind of issue that entire voting blocks turn on. The centerpiece of the Dem offense against the GOP is going to be the Ryan Budget. When Medicare is on the line, how many Dems are going to vote GOP or stay home because the President is gay-friendly?
If Obama speaks out in favor of gay marriage – not aggressively, just as an answer to various opinion questions – he can turn people’s opinions on the issue as much as he turns their opinion of him. By speaking out in favor, he can increase support for gay marriage. That’s the benefit of a President’s advocacy.
The question you have to ask is whether anti-marriage states would become anti-Obama states or pro-marriage states, once he gave his honest opinion.
danimal
@Jonas–I agree that, barring a miracle, the GOP will walk back their principled stand against judicial filibusters and deny a vote to any Obama nominee to the left of Scalito. I differ with you, though in assuming this means the continuation of a 5-4 conservative majority. Instead, it virtually guarantees years of a 4-4 stalemate.
Roger Moore
@JCT:
Simple. The theory is that we need to elect a batshit insane Republican who will do his or her best to destroy the country. That will teach the ignorant voters how evil the Republicans are so they’ll never vote for another Republican until the end of time. It’s a brilliant plan; see how well it worked when we elected W?
ruemara
Dan Savage is an Obot? Wow, some of you really need to reassess how free from personal ire towards Obama you really are. Savage has been harsh and sometimes even fact-free in his criticism. This article is a tremendous shift for him. It’s like he suddenly discovered politics or something. That being said, I’m hopeful that Obama will make some moves on DOMA, but I’m not sure his views on marriage will change. If he became more religious and more conservative thanks to being married and a parent, as many people say it has made them, it’s possible that’s why his views shifted. Then again, I’m not in the man’s brain, who knows why. As long as gays get their rights, who gives a fuck what Obama’s personal views are. I elected a president, not a best buddy.
Lol
JSF @8: Don’t forget to thank Lieberman for DADT repeal. I wonder if that would have still happened if Obama took the Professional Left’s advice and shat down Joe’s throat?
boss bitch
I don’t agree with this. besides, the majority of Americans already support gay marriage. The support activists need will be in the Senate. Specifically from Dem Senators who come from red states where Obama has little to no influence over public opinion.
Just Some Fuckhead
Don’t forget he’s also the one that supposedly killed the Medicare buy in option and damn near killed himself to get John McCain and Sarah Palin elected.
These Senate stalwarts also voted for DADT repeal: Susan Collins (R-Maine), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), Scott Brown (R-Mass.), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and George Voinovich (R-Ohio).
JCT
Her pancreatic cancer was an incidental finding that occurred during another workup. Given the horrific survival numbers for someone her age with pancreatic cancer she would be dead by now. They either got it before it spread *anywhere* or it was one of the rare indolent forms. This is unlikely to be a factor.
I was muttering “here we go again with this bullshit” right up until your last line. .
Really, people — the current Supreme court has done terrible damage thanks to W’s picks. Let’s not do this again. Thank goodness Obama went out of his way to choose young Justices.
Mnemosyne
Apparently you missed the 2004 election, where the Republicans put anti-gay-marriage statutes on the ballot in every state that allowed them and managed to turn the tide to get Bush (re-)elected. Even here in “liberal” California, we managed to simultaneously ban gay marriage and elect Obama just two years ago.
I just don’t have your confidence that gay marriage is now such a non-issue that it’s completely risk-free for the president to support it in states like North Carolina and Virginia.
arguingwithsignposts
just imagine, only 18 more months of this shit from T, I and friends!
dedc79
I just hate the whole “my views are evolving” lie. We all know his views haven’t evolved, they’ve been the same on this issue for years, what’s evolved is his ability to be honest about it now that over half the country agrees with him.
Leaders sometime need to lead. Two things move public opinion on this issue. ONe is the fact that so many people are related to, are friends with, or work with gay people and once the issue is personalized they see the light. The other is finding out that people you respect, whether they be friends, family, co-workers, and yes PUBLIC OFFICIALS, support gay marriage. Obama’s public endorsement of gay marriage could actually move public opinion in a good way. To do that he needs to be a leader not a follower.
Tim, Interrupted
I know it will be difficult for you to understand this, but not everyone calibrates their thinking and speech to the U.S. election calendar.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about the fake Afghanistan draw down, which is nothing BUT political theatre carefully timed to election cycles for the consumption of idiots such as yourself.
Trurl
When your guy does it, it’s not considered “lying”. It’s considered a tactful evasion to enable his election so he can do wonderful things for you.
When Mitt Romney does it, he’s a cravenly unprincipled flip-flopper.
Tim, Interrupted
With your permission, cosigned and heartily endorsed.
arguingwithsignposts
@ T, I: since you’ve already stated you aren’t voting, your opinion means jack shit, but please, you and trurl keep up your True Progressive jihad.
Lynn Dee
Hey, good on him. I agree with Savage.
By which I mean to say — has Obama made the right calculation politically? I don’t know. But I’ve no doubt it’s a calculation and that he knows anything less than full equality, including gay marriage, is unconstitutional.
Alan in SF
This is a pretty good argument for Obama not advocating in favor of anything.
Oh, wait…
AxelFoley
@Zifnab:
So basically, you’re talking bully pulpit, right?
Yeah, you see how well that works in today’s media, don’t you?
Mnemosyne
Uh, isn’t that someone whose views have “evolved”? Since you don’t think that anyone’s views ever evolve, do you think they were lying before when they said they were against gay marriage, or are they lying now when they say they support it? Or is it only politicians whose views never evolve and are always set in stone?
Just Some Fuckhead
@arguingwithsanity:
As an admitted recent former Republican, perhaps you aren’t entirely qualified to determine what constitutes True Progressivism.
Lol
@24: and you still can’t connect any dots.
liberal
@JCT:
“Thank goodness Obama went out of his way to choose young Justices.”
I actually like Sotomayor, but she’s a smoker and type 1 diabetic, so by a reasonable extension of your logic she wasn’t a good choice.
liberal
@16:
Yeah. If too much time passes, she’s going to seem selfish.
Tim, Interrupted
@ AWS at #31:
Will do!
Tis true: I don’t give my vote away to the first pretty-talkin’, smooth-voiced poli-whore who comes along, throatily whispering just what I want to hear, as do you. No, unlike you, I pay attention to actions in the real world, not the moist and meaningless flutterings of my poli-clit.
So I take it Obama is still diddling yours?
Mnemosyne
Poor Timmy — he’s so worried that Obama doesn’t think he’s fuckable that he just can’t bring himself to vote for him.
Oddly, most of us vote on, like, issues and policies and not if we think the candidate is going to sleep with us like Timmy does, but I guess he has to choose his own ways to vote.
Tim, Interrupted
If that were true, you would pay attention to his ACTIONS not his WORDS. But you’re so emotionally invested you can’t see anything but stars of hope. Even after three years of same old, same old.
Of course you’re pretending to take the exact opposite understanding of my words as their meaning, but then that habit would explain why you’re still in love with barry.
btw…when you say “we” and “most of us…” in your comments, to whom are you referring, specifically? I have noted this habit among BJ Obots: A fervent need to include themselves as part of a meaningful “we” of some sort. Could you explain? Thanks.
ETA: Oh, never mind, I get it: You are part of the “WE” in WE ARE THE CHANGE WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR. Poor thing. Here you are, three years later…still waiting, your policlit throbbing for release.
eemom
@Mnemosyne
oh, so THAT’s what he meant when said his vote must be “earned.” It all makes sense now.
JCT
@liberal
As a physician I am pretty careful about determining someone’s suitability for a position based on their health, especially when one of the risk factors is fully behavior-based and the other has been managed in the long-term. These are the sorts of concerns, for example, that make geneticists very worried about “genotyping everyone” to determine susceptibilities.
Unless of course the subject is whether folks with a high risk of loss of consciousness are involved in public transportation .
Besides, Sotomayor has really good health care as I understand it……
eemom
I am she as you are he as you are me and we are all together, Timmeh. Except you.
Mnemosyne
You mean like getting the ACA passed? Or signing the DADT repeal? Or extending unemployment benefits?
I guess that signing bills into law is “just words” and not an action since he uses a pen to do it and his name is made of words. Good one, Timmy.
Tim, Interrupted
Go fist fuck your gaping, spider-webbed hole, you ancient husk.
Tim, Interrupted
ACA is a four-year deferred gift to for profit insurance companies.
DADT repeal awaits CERTIFICATION, thus still in effect.
As for UI, could you specify how Barry is responsible for that extension?
Now, let’s talk Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Wall Street, FISA, prosecution of whistle blowers, extension of Bush Tax Cuts…
Gay in agreement
The goal is to win and if it takes being pragmatic in the short term to win the WH then more power to them. This country can’t handle these wingnuts in power again and I am not the type of person that needs my politicians to commit political sepaku to move our issues along. The tide is with us so be realistic and realize the world we live in does not always move as fast as we want…but gosh lets not try to shot ourselves in the foot
Duckest Fuckingway: Ask not for whom the Duck Fucks. . .
Where were all these ‘vote for the lesser evil’ folks when we were trying to get Dukakis or Mondale elected?
Oh, that’s right, they were voting Republican.
AxelFoley
@Timmeh:
Gotta admit, I chuckled at this. Misogynistic as fuck, but still crudely funny.
Just Some Fuckhead
But it’s all different now. They’re the smartest motherfuckers on the planet. And activists too!
ruemara
You know, Tim, in light of this nasty comment, go DIAF you stupid bastard.
Axel, you can join him. You find that shit funny? Assholes.
Mnemosyne
So the fact that you don’t like them means they don’t exist? So much for “reality based.”
You mean other than negotiating it and signing it into law?
Though I do love how you give him all of the blame for extending the Bush tax cuts and none of the credit for extending the UI benefits even though they were tied together and the UI extension depended on the tax cut extension. It’s pretty much your MO — ignore any and everything that gets in the way of your belief that Obama is History’s Greatest Monster.
Mnemosyne
Here’s another way that Timmy is right — look at this horrible speech given by the new senior enlisted advisor to the head of the Marines:
Yep, clearly the armed forces are going to come back to the president and tell him that they can’t certify the DADT repeal and Obama is going to drop the whole thing. Timmy says so, so therefore it must be, reality be damned.
Tim, Interrupted
Ah, poor Reumara’s tender feefees are offended. You must not have been around during the multiple threads in which eesmarm and She Who Must Not Be Named were dishing out homophobic, misandrist, sexually explicit insults and violent imagery.
You know, basically projectile vomiting what they are unable and unwilling to take in return.
Hey…I’m just keeping it real.
A Humble Lurker
@Tim, Interrupted
A link would be nice. Also, it’s comforting to see you value taking the highroad.
Also, who ever said eemom was a ‘she’?
Tim, Interrupted
I don’t need a link to know eesmarm’s past M.O. It behavior and her hypocrisy are seared into my brain. If you need to update yourself, search the archives yourself.
As for your need for comfort: Fuck you and the Highroad Horse you think you rode in on.
AxelFoley
@ ruemara:
Calm thyself, wench!
I did say it was sexist as fuck, though crude.
Unclench thine arse.
Mike Kay (Team America)
Uh-Oh. Savage won’t get invited to the cool parties at next year’s nutroot’s freakout.
Comrade Kevin
Tim, Interrupted: misogynist.