I’m an Obot and I know a Real Progressive President would have done it earlier blah blah blah, but I’m really happy that the president backed marriage equality. Sometimes there is progress.
A change is gonna come
by DougJ| 123 Comments
This post is in: Gay Rights are Human Rights, Proud to Be A Democrat, OBAMA IS WORSE THAN BUSH HE SOLD US OUT!!, Rare Sincerity, The Failed Obama Administration (Only Took Two Weeks)
In before Wildpyrate called Obama the n-word.
he’ll never be the bipartisan magical unification pony that i never dreamed he’d be.
our friend charles over at Esquire has written an excellent piece.
change has come. yay! :)
Meanwhile the great patriot Michelle Bachmann chooses to adopt Swiss “Eurosocialist hell hole” citizenship.
Seeing a flurry of handwringing and concern-trollery about this all over the place… sigh.
@Bruce S: Only because liberals made her, and if you doubt that such an argument has already been advanced, I’ll direct you to the NRO fever swamp.
Reason 1001# Andrew Sullivan has the self-awareness of a sea cucumber:
His reaction to the firing of NSR earlier today:
His reaction to Obama’s backing of same sex marriage just recently:
I sent this email to Andrew, but I doubt it will get posted. See if you can spot the changes I made to NSR’s article!
The Most Persuasive Case for Eliminating Gay Studies? Just Read the Dissertations.
“You’ll have to forgive the lateness but I just got around to reading The Chronicle’s recent piece on the young guns of gay studies. If ever there were a case for eliminating the discipline, the sidebar explaining some of the dissertations being offered by the best and the brightest of gay studies graduate students has made it. What a collection of left-wing victimization claptrap. The best that can be said of these topics is that they’re so irrelevant no one will ever look at them.”
“Seriously, folks, there are legitimate debates about the problems that plague the gay community from high rates of drug use to low marriage rates to high teenage suicide rates. But it’s clear that they’re not happening in gay-studies departments. If these young scholars are the future of the discipline, I think they can just as well leave their calendars at 1969 Stonewall Riots and let some legitimate scholars find solutions to the problems of homosexuals in America. Solutions that don’t begin and end with blaming the actions of straight people.”
See the difference, Andrew? Is it still within the bounds of provocative intellectual opinion? If so, I expect more glowing reviews and approval of right-wing homophobic screeds on your site in the future. After all, it’s merely “edgy” and “provocative,” right? Clearly no one is being hurt.
Try to have some self-awareness in the future before you help denigrate one minority and then, 5 posts later, celebrate the progress of your own.
This is good news. I assume Obama will come around to economic stimulus soon, followed by health care access for everyone and maybe one day Wall St regulation. I can dream, can’t I?
Sometimes Obama moves slowly but he seems to move in the right direction.
Affect on the election? I dunno. I’ve seen a number of folks speculate on that question, each with a different conclusion.
@Bruce S: I wonder why she feels so at home with the Swiss?
Doug: Climb down from your holier-than-thou cross. Own up to the fact that a huge percentage of the democratic rank-and-file are comprised of the so-called “progressives” you routinely insult as being anarchistic. That act is getting stale.
I come for the witty banter but stay for the front pagers trolling their own blog.
You know what we need to all make nice again? A thread about Jonah Goldberg lying about being nominated for a Pulitzer Prize. Firebaggers and Obots alike can laugh at that, right? Me, I’m just hoping that Roy Edroso takes a swing at that one.
I graduated in 1967 an I can remember openly gay folk so this comment at sully’s surprised me..
My heart sings. It does. In 1980 there was not one openly gay person in my 1600-student high school. In 1989, Denmark was the first nation to introduce civil unions (not even marriage!), and I thought, That will never, never, never happen here.
Maybe it depends on the definition of openly gay person. Am I wrong?
This was nice. I”m really glad for my gay and lesbian friends.
Of course, no bankster opposed this. The fortune 500 support it. And no legislation needed to pass.
So this was soft power at best. And no, this is not major change. Major change will be when our government arrests the first rich fuck who stole from us, or when the first major weapons system is cancelled, or when the Bush Tax Cuts really are rescinded. Still waiting….
Where’d you go to school? Maybe different parts of the country and all that.
@Spaghetti Lee: Next thing is that you’ll tell me that Romney lies and there is no easter bunny. . Thanks a lot.
NØbama should be tried for treason!
How does this square with Romney’s belief that the definition of marriage is the union of a man with an indefinite number of women?
Like the FCS MGVs?
Yes, the only thing preventing that from happening is Obama’s personal opinion on the issue. There is, after all, nothing preventing him from enshrining his own ideas as law whenever he wants, so any failures on that front can only be attributed to his lack of interest. Glad we have you around to remind us.
Same for you, darlin’. And are you actively trying to do the stereotypical FDL “Oh, this thing I criticized Obama about for years suddenly isn’t relevant, so I’m going to suddenly pretend it doesn’t matter and hope no one notices” thing? Because honestly you couldn’t have pulled it off better if you tried.
BTW, the historian part of me thinks that this announcement by the President is a big fucking deal.
@Spaghetti Lee: Small town in MA. It truly depends on the meaning of open. A few friends were never shunned and quite popular but friends new. It was really no big deal. That was during the Viet-Nam era and things were changing.
The Catholic Church that I belonged helped Joe Lieberman’s, wife’s family settle in town. As I said the times were different.
Forum Transmitted Disease
@dollared: Wow. Someone who thinks that government is still in a position to dictate to the banksters and moneymen. Case you haven’t noticed, my friend, those days have been gone for almost 20 years.
Posters are so cute when they’re young and naive.
@BGinCHI: For one second that made me think of Mitt Romney having sex. So naturally I hate you.
There is something to be said about the drama of it all; that Obama “evolved” and became enlightened. Kind of like Cole’s “evolution” from a douche to a good guy. If Cole had started out a lib/prog – meh – those are a dime a dozen.
It somehow gives Obama a bit more credibility, I think; that he carefully thought about it and was Very Serious about the whole business.
Anyway, it’s a good move and it overshadows the entire “states rights” angle that some are criticizing: see Gawker/Serwer
DougJ, Head of Infidelity
I am a far left soshulist progressive myself.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@dollared: Um, yeah, laws will have to be passed or the SC will have to overturn everything. His announcement amounted to him announcing that he’s for gay marriage. NC still has an amendment banning everything they banned yesterday. Texas can still ban gay marriage.
This is definitely something to be proud of, but the country wasn’t just magically made right because of it.
You have to listen to the actual interview tape to appreciate how much Obama *hated* being forced to do this. [Thanks for nothing, Biden, you dumbfuck!] It’s the sound of a man reluctantly taking tiny nibbles of a shit sandwich.
But please, don’t let that stop you from jizzing yourselves over the scrap he’s tossed you from the table.
the bad thing about what obama did was that it wasn’t some other better thing
@Linda Featheringill: A president declares his support for a recently (and still widely!) despised minority? Ho-hum.
DougJ, Head of Infidelity
May have to be a tag.
@shortstop: No throat-punching, please. I’m using it.
@DougJ, Head of Infidelity: Do it! We’ll get your back when Cole goes ballistic.
@BGinCHI: I’m a peace-loving woman except when people Go Too Far. You’re still well within reasonable limits.
@Trurl: Yeah, Nader would have done this the day after inauguration.
You know, I’m curious about this mind-reading ability that only seems to happen with left-wing purity trolls. Maybe it’s contagious? Because it seems to me when you have to skulk away from what the guy actually said and into the pseudo-scientific muck of “Oh, let me analyze his body language/posture/facial expression/feng shui and let you know what he really meant”, which leads to you arguing that the guy who just said he supports gay marriage actually, secretly hates gay people, well, it seems to me that you don’t have a fucking leg to stand on. But hey, you can read minds and I can’t, so educate me, O Wise One.
I really love to sing this song loudly in the shower. One of the neighbors once diplomatically mentioned that I’m not Sam Cooke.
Great news. Not a concern troll, but sincerely hope this does not rally the crazy base and cause unintended consequences. That being said, I will always prefer leaders doing the right thing even at personal or political risk instead of endless triangulation.
@Spaghetti Lee: I’ve been laughing about that all day — classic.
@JWL: approximately ZERO% of Obama’s base have anything to do with douchebags who slam him 24/7 on “left” wing blogs.
But don’t let me stop your self-important narcissism.
@LanceThruster: The crazy base was already rallied. Now the liberal base is much more so, too, except for assholes who ain’t worth the time.
Well, Obama’s lost Trurl. Might as well concede the election right now.
P.S. I have never, ever heard an “obot” make an argument as specious as “Yes, he said he thinks X, but THE TONE OF HIS VOICE proves that he meant the opposite!” But I guess being disingenuous in the pursuit of progressiveness is no vice, or something like that.
Jizzing in a gay marriage thread? Never!
@Spaghetti Lee: This is SO true. Again, they are as delusional as wingnuts. They loathe him unconditionally, and have constructed their own fantasy land in which literally everything he says or does is interpreted as evil.
@LanceThruster: Twenty-seven percent will be convinced this makes the president a Muslim because that makes sense. It will bother another twenty-seven percent but those folks are either more concerned about tax cuts or the economy. The best quote of the day came from the person who wrote, Obama lost the vote of those who won’t vote for him anyway.
@shortstop: Don’t make me get you banned from the soup place…..
@Trurl: So when’s the last time you were actually happy? You know there are degrees of happy. You could, for instance, have been moderately pleased for a bit and tried to keep that feeling going. Have you ever tried it? It’s not a gateway slippery slope drug.
I just say that because I worry about you. You’ve never posted a single thing on any thread on any issue that makes me thing you are capable of being happy, even in a minor way.
unless NØbama dumps Biden and replaces him with Barney Frank then he’s worst than Hitler.
That’s categories. Tags are fine. We’ll still have his back, just in case.
You’ll be shocked, SHOCKED that the Republicans competing for Feinstein’s seat are not-so-much with the ghey marriage thing. For that matter, find a difference with the Republicans in South Carolina. From today’s Sacramento Bee online candidates Q&A.
Without a gazillionaire running, it could be a pretty predictable outcome in November.
This. I want that better thing he hasn’t done yet. I also got a bad feeling about the guy.
And what position did he take? And did he flip-flop? How often?
@BGinCHI: Didn’t Romney revolve on that decision?
@Maude: Oh, yeah! Carry on.
@Linda Featheringill: I used to think of you as a gentle soul, but now I see your delicious vicious streak.
I’ve heard plenty of wingnuts make it. It’s the Anchoress’ whole shtick, for example. And it’s a great tool for hack political reporters who don’t care to talk about policy. Worthwhile political arguments? Don’t see it there that often.
You’re probably not Aaron Neville, either.
@BGinCHI: What? I said you had plenty of wiggle room.
They’d never ban me, anyway. They love me because I come in dripping with gratitude for what they’re about to give me. They even put free baklava in my bag.
I can’t let you use a strap-on, I’m running for office for Pete’s sake!
Listen up, guys! Two time academy award winner Jewish Steel has some breaking news:
@MikeJ: Dude, TLA translation, please.
OK, let’s talk about what the guy actually said…
He said that states have the right to prohibit black men from marrying black men.
Somehow, this is supposed to be different than saying that states have the right to prohibit black men from marrying white women. But he knew that he wouldn’t need to provide an explanation to cultists like you.
Loved this quote from Glen Greenwald:
Because Mitt Romney might make anything better for a gay person concerned about a lot of issues? I guess if that gay person has a car elevator.
John Scalzi has this one.
You know who else misused the word “worst”?
@David Koch: How DARE he do this after North Carolina! Too little, too late! He is history’s WORST MONSTER!
The Democratic convention this summer is being held in North Carolina.
@J.W. Hamner: No, J.W., but according to Paultard Greenwald, Ron Paul will.
What horseshit. NC did not ban gay marriage yesterday. Gay marriage has been banned in NC for years, by statute. That is what was so stupid about Amendment 1. They did it so that a Judge can’t rule the statute unconstitutional, it was an end run around “activist judges”.
@NotMax: Read Pam Spaulding thoughts. She makes good arguments as to why it should stay there.
@NotMax: That should be interesting.
Oh Boo Hoo….I’m sorry…I’m at a loss to mock you now. I’ll use my magic 8 ball powers and try again later.
@Forum Transmitted Disease: Actually, I’m so old I defended a CEO from securities fraud charges, just because he sent his kids to school in Switzerland and had the company pay for it – without telling the public shareholders.
Because, you see, his $450,000 salary wouldn’t cover the expense.
Now that is old school. Imagine that. A CEO with a limited household budget. Securities laws. A right to sue a corporation that lies to you.
And yes, it has to all come back. And if you don’t agree, then get out of my sight, because you are enabling corruption by expecting corruption.
The reality is that President Obama is the most pro-gay-rights President in the history of this country. I don’t know how well this will play politically, but it’ll play well at Clooney’s fundraiser (and others like it) and energize the gay dollar in ways that are yet to be calculated. Even though he’s hedged on marriage equality, most voters have already learned he’s relatively gay-friendly – this will ensure that. Biden’s gaffe on Sunday now looks like a classic political set-up.
On policy, this changes nothing. It would take a Loving v. Virginia or a constitutional amendment to enshrine marriage equality throughout the U.S. I don’t think Obama is going to endorse a constitutional amendment just now and Presidents don’t really determine those anyway.
Villago Delenda Est
I doubt if Sully has the intellectual integrity to take your words to heart, though.
Which is, at this point, the law. And it will remain the law until/if the Supreme Court rules that discriminating against gay couples is not allowed under the Equal Protection Clause. Given that the SC is currently titled conservative, it is in fact wise for supporters of gay marriage to not directly challenge that status quo right now, lest the court explicitly rule that gay marriage is not protected under the Equal Protection Clause, thus ruining any chance for a nationwide gay marriage amendment of any sort. Your analogy is also shit, because bans on interracial marriage explicitly have been ruled illegal under the EPC. You know, that whole Loving v. Virginia thing?
You getting all this?
All the “explanation” that I needed was a rudimentary understanding of discrimination law in this country, and an awareness that presidents are, in fact, legally bound by the current laws on the books. Because you are a moron, you’re not aware of any of this. I hope I’ve cleared it up.
I think the President was pitch perfect in waiting til the NC vote was over. A lot of people are feeling revulsion at the outcome and shame for NC. They provide the wind to his back. If the vote had gone the other way, he would also have had the wind at his back. Speaking out too soon would have opened him up to criticism for meddling in state affairs, etc. He could send his lieutenants out to relay the message to those who were persuadable or had ears to hear that he would be on board soon.
Davis X. Machina
OT but not really. I missed Nicholas Katzenbach’s death earlier this week. My brother, when he was young, wanted to grow up to be either Burke Marshall or Nick Katzenbach. Every other kid in the neighborhood wanted to be Fred Lynn.
Then I guess with the conveniently short memory found among your ilk, you have already forgotten two days ago – at which time any of your would have said, “Sure, Obama *says* that he’s not in favor of gay marriage but, come on, you know that he really doesn’t mean it.”
@Villago Delenda Est: I agree. If Obama and the Democrats rammed through a Constitutional Amendment enshrining the full panoply of gay rights, within 18 months Sully would be a Republican again. He would be free – to refocus on the crippling degeneracy of a society where health care is freely available and old people can retire before age 70.
I was eating.
And as it turns out, we were right! Maybe because we were looking at actual events that happened, such as the repeal of DADT and the non-defense of DOMA in court and using that to judge that he was broadly friendly towards gay rights, and would likely come out in support of gay marriage in the near future? We weren’t relying on facial expression analysis, I can tell you that much.
@Spaghetti Lee: If we ever get a Loving v. Virginia, that’ll be the day I cry with gratitude, joy and jubilation!
Heh… the Leader’s bootlickers are never at a loss to explain why equality before the law, while a fine thing in theory, isn’t something that it’s practical to push for just this minute.
You all trotted out the same crap to excuse his footdragging on DADT repeal. And after people like Dan Choi and (God help us) Joe Lieberman finally made it too costly for him to hide from the issue any longer – just as Biden put his back against the wall now – you fell all over yourselves pretending that Obama deserved all the credit.
@Trurl: His “foot-dragging” on DADT was actually lining up support for repeal in the Pentagon and congress. Are you really this fucking stupid?
In GA we passed an amendment years ago stating that marriage is between a man and a woman. The state rep that introduced it was divorced and accused of adultery but it was the gays that were gonna ruin the institution of marriage. bigots all.
@JPL: That quote brought a smile to my face…thx.
(I agree, also too)
There’s one in every crowd, folks.
Takes a Supreme Court and a president who can nominate wise justices.
@patroclus: I only know what that means because I recently saw the doc. Excellent ref.
@patroclus: I do think that if Romney is elected he’ll introduce a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. It could pass, sadly.
@shortstop: Good points.
I like that even though you’re just making up a counter-example out of whole cloth, you couldn’t even bother to work in the “sonic psycho-analysis” thing that you’re trying to defend.
Very proud of President Obama. Became a citizen in 2006 and voted for him in 2008 and will dying to vote for him again this year.
Go Obama!! Why you took so long to state the obvious is beyond me, but glad that you finally came out and did the right thing.
He may lose some votes, but I think this was a good move on his part. Homophobes are on the losing side of history and this just makes that more clear.
Of course, to have a Real Progressive President, you need a Real Progressive Country. It would be nice if the Real Progressives would help in that process.
Things like this give me hope. We have a ways to go, but small-p progress is indeed happening.
@Hill Dweller: Yes, concern trurl really is that fucking stupid. Or duplicitous, I don’t care which.
The Sheriff's A Ni-
Obama put another bullet in any ‘dime’s worth of difference’ bullshit, and – lo and behold – out comes the usual ratfuckery. Surprise, surprise, surprise.
Trurl is pretty obviously a reactionary pretending to be a liberal. Or so far off on the left end that he wraps around and agrees with the far right. In either case, I’ve never seem any evidence that he is willing to change his mind. Assuming that he believes anything he says, which I doubt.
@JWL: I see that you didn’t see what you did there. You’re funny.
@Brachiator: Yeah, I know. It’s too bad Obama can’t do it FDR’s way. He had a recalcitrant Supreme Court for 5 years, but then Rayburn and Sumners passed a bill that finally paid pensions to retired USSC Justices and suddenly there were many appointments. This’ll be a multi-year, possibly decades-long battle, and Obama’s election is an important step.
Villago Delenda Est
Oooh! Oooh! (/raises hand furiously, waving it around) Ask me! Ask me! I know the simple answer to this simple question!
Sometimes people forget what this President has been through personally. Would they be able to overcome it?
DougJ just reminded me. That song is almost half a century old. Change is very often slow, but it will come if we fight for it.
Obama saying that he personally supports marriage equality but the matter should be left to the states isn’t actually backing marriage equality. It’s taking the incoherent middle ground between “marriage equality is a fundamental right” and “gays are the greatest threat to our country next to muslims” and setting himself up to punch hippies.
Saying “I support inter-racial marriage but Loving v. Virginia was wrong” marks a person as a bigoted piece of shit. Maybe Obama will deserve some credit when he stakes out a position that doesn’t mark him as a bigoted piece of shit.
@LanceThruster: I saw the documentary as well – the interesting thing that I learned was how blatant the Virginia statute was and how bigoted the lower court opinions were. North Carolina (and other states) today have emulated as to gays what their Virginia predecessors did to African-Americans.
Villago Delenda Est
But that’s not what he’s saying.
What will happen, eventually, is full faith and credit will kick in and force the issue.
This is an evolutionary process, not a revolutionary one, now.
The change is coming. It may not happen in the next five minutes, but it is coming.
Villago Delenda Est
And once again, you can see the historical parallel with the desegregation of the military in the late 40’s and the Civil Rights movement and the death of Jim Crow in the 60’s.
Gay rights have followed the same pattern, often with the same arguments.
@Trurl: It could be because his actions were always in support of gay marriage, but I suppose you’re the most knowledgeable one on things.
@R Johnston: Look upthread. Your article is factually incorrect, but hyperbolically excellent.
@Villago Delenda Est:
Sorry, but that’s exactly what he’s saying. He said it should be left to the states. That’s not exactly an endorsement of using the Full Faith and Credit clause to take the matter away from the states.
There’s also the problem that marriage isn’t a contract between two people; it’s a contract between two people and the state. The Full Faith and Credit clause gets you enforcement of the contract if you take it seriously, but it doesn’t get you substitution of one state for another as a party to the contract unless you establish marriage equality as a fundamental right that states can’t deny.
Villago Delenda Est
Eventually, the states will fall in line. It will take time, but the full faith and credit clause will force the issue.
If you’re an Obot, you can’t be taken seriously. You’ve taken a vacation from observable reality so anything you say is worthless and not worth debating.
In that vein, note that Barack Obama did not “take a stand on gay marriage.” He expressed a meaningless opinion. This is typical of Barack Obama — create an illusion that he’s a vibrant decisive progressive, then sign executive orders which push forward the extremist far-right Bush-presidency agenda on actual policy.
“‘Huge,’ he calls it” she thought to herself, “Heh. As if.”
You people are sociopaths. Do you strangle Obama voodoo dolls to death every night as you weep yourselves to sleep?
Christ, it’s like an all-star team of smirking purity trolls in here. Funny how they only come out to play when there’s good news to piss on and rats to fuck.
The only question is whether they’re knowing tools of the Republicans or whether they work for free.
@Hill Dweller: I really cannot believe anyone who actually takes policy seriously is still bitching about the way the President handled DADT.
…oh wait, I just put my finger on the problem.
Gaaaah. It’s impossible to keep the trolls straight here!
Ben Cisco (onboard the Defiant)
@Lojasmo: It’s made reading the site on a mobile a real pain, I’ll tell you that right now.
I’m an Obot too, and it’s a great day for civil rights. :D
The arc of history…
And Obama said anything like that, where, exactly? Or have you already forgotten about Obama dropping the defense of DOMA?
Loving v Virginia didn’t change the states’ ability to set their own marriage laws — it just invalidated one specific part of those laws (ie anti-miscegenation laws). If the Supreme Court decides against DOMA, the same thing will happen for same-sex couples that happened for interracial couples and — surprise! — the states will still get to determine their own marriage laws just like they did after Loving v Virginia.
I really wish people would read up on this stuff before getting their panties in a twist.
Asking politicians to do what they say is now “trolling.”
So when the senile sociopath Ronald Reagan claimed he was cutting taxes for the middle class to make America more prosperous, I was “trolling” when I pointed that Reagan was a liar because he was cutting taxes for the rich while presiding over the biggest tax increase in history on working people.
And when Clinton ran for re-election on the basis that he was the only person who could undo the terrible damage Clinton himself had done by signing off on brutal welfare “reforms” that forced children to live in cars with their parents, I was “trolling” when I criticizes Clinton for that abysmally bad decision and his subsequent dishonest spin about his bad policy.
And when the drunk-driving C student ran for president by falsely claiming that his gigantic tax cuts for the rich would cut taxes for the average person, I was “trolling” when I pointed out that Bush and his torturer sidekick were pathological compulsive sociopathic liars.
Well, that’s good to know. Apparently someone who points out a flagrant wildly obvious contradiction between a person’s words and their actions is now “trolling.”
Okay then! I compliment you for your intelligence and savoir faire, you halfwitted piece of mongoloid shit. And now if you point out that there’s a gaping chasm twixt what I claim to do and what I’ve actually done…why…you’re trolling.
Christ on a minibike. How in the hell did we get to a nadir of bizarre dementia where pointing out that observable reality differs from what people claim it is has somehow mutated into “trolling”…?
Yes, when I voted for Obama in 2008, I was a “knowing tool of the Republicans.”
Do you even bother to read the gibberish you type, or do you just operate on automatic pilot, like a baboon on LSD?
So tell us, mclaren, which executive order of Obama’s pushed an extremist far-right Bush-presidency agenda on LGBT rights? Was it his EO extending benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees or are you thinking of a different extremist anti-gay policy that Obama signed an EO for? Please be specific.