Hey, Obama critics? You had nothing to do with the president showing up at the HRC dinner on Saturday night. That was just a response to Joe Solmonese inviting him to speak, not the growing volume of your unhappiness with his leadership. That’s because, according CNBC’s Washington correspondent John Harwood, the White House thinks we’re just a bunch of pajama-wearing complainers!
He’s correct, but only a quarter of the time; we do have to venture out for three-hour lunches, ya know.
It’s hard to tell when Harwood is just winging it, or relaying sentiments directly from Obama’s camp. But as he tells it, the gays who marched over the weekend are part of the fringe of Obama’s Democratic base, and their (read: our) concerns don’t need to be seriously dealt with. At the very least, that way of thinking explains all of Obama’s platitudes, and lack of action.
UPDATE: White House senior communications adviser Dan Pfeiffer shoots down Harwood’s claims: “That sentiment does not reflect White House thinking at all, we’ve held easily a dozen calls with the progressive online community because we believe the online communities can often keep the focus on how policy will affect the American people rather than just the political back-and-forth.”
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
UPDATE 2: Harwood gets in on clarifications. “My comments quoting an Obama adviser about liberal bloggers/pajamas weren’t about the LGBT community or the marchers. They referred more broadly to those grumbling on the left about an array of issues in addition to gay rights, including the war in Afghanistan and health care and Guantanamo — and whether all that added up to trouble with Obama’s liberal base.”
Nelson G.
I don’t blog in pajamas – Russell Cotton & Champion casuals actually. And between my militant blogging, I’m tending to my dog, running errands, and doing other odds and ends; all the while, wondering WTF?
tavdy79
If that’s really Obama’s attitude, he’ll soon be waving goodbye to the Dems’ filibuster-proof Senate supermajority. The LGBT community amounts to roughly one in 20 Americans. If even a fifth of gay voters choose to stay home next year, that’s more than enough to ensure several marginal Dem Senators lose their seats – and the Dems only need to lose one.
If Obama wants to see the power of the gay vote, all he needs to do is look at the UK – we’ve got a general election next year, and one of the key groups which could decide the election are British LGBTs – this is why Cameron has been wooing us ever since he took leadership of the Tory party.
McShane
@No. 2 · tavdy79 The Supermajority has proven to be prey much of a super nothing. A good part of the Democratic party should really be called Republicans and the Republicans Neocons , Fascists or whatever. There is no distinct left wing and has not been for ages.
If Obama gets the gay vote , he’ll sacrifice that of the religious fanatics who number in the millions. People in the UK are much better educated than the faith based , right wing in the U.S. The U.K hasn’t been this deranged since Cromwell.
Jim
Gays will fall in line.
Fitz
McShane is very right. The democrats got their democratic president and super majority and on day one starting punting to the right. They don’t know how to be the majority party.
I don’t fully agree about the gay vote Vs. the religious vote, however. For some of the more extreme that will hold true– not for most.
rudy
He must’ve been talking about these folks:
http://anarchistnews.org/?q=node/9869
Brian
It is time for the gays and lesbians to walk out on the democratic party. The current crop, Barry, Harry and Nancy just refuse to repeal DADT and DOMA now, when they have a supermajority. You would think the democratic party, who signed off on DADT and DOMA would want to undue these laws while they can. But they just keep throwing us under the bus. Fuck them.