Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
pullquote

Here’s The Gay Part Of Obama’s State Of The Union

THERE! ARE YOU HAPPY?

tonight, let us speak with one voice in reaffirming that our nation is united in support of our troops and their families. Let us serve them as well as they have served us – by giving them the equipment they need; by providing them with the care and benefits they have earned; and by enlisting our veterans in the great task of building our own nation. Our troops come from every corner of this country – they are black, white, Latino, Asian and Native American. They are Christian and Hindu, Jewish and Muslim. And, yes, we know that some of them are gay. Starting this year, no American will be forbidden from serving the country they love because of who they love. And with that change, I call on all of our college campuses to open their doors to our military recruiters and the ROTC. It is time to leave behind the divisive battles of the past. It is time to move forward as one nation.

Now is the part where you latch on to “starting this year,” and read in to that Obama’s commitment to certify repeal of DADT before Christmas. And it’s also the part where you talk about how he didn’t mention the Defense Of Marriage Act, or any of your other pet causes.

To be fair, neither Wisconsin’s Republican Rep. Paul Ryan nor Tea Party lady Michele Bachmann mentioned you queers either.

By:           Max Simon
On:           Jan 25, 2011
Tagged: , ,
  • 40 Comments
    • DC Steve
      DC Steve

      Actually I’m going to latch onto language like “I call on all of our college campuses to open their doors to our military recruiters and the ROTC”, and all the talk about how things are so great in Iraq and Afghanistan, and calling for cuts of “tens of billions” in military spending (that’s barely a 2% cut).

      Better than I expected, and I remain optimistic, but more or less the same old same old.

      Jan 25, 2011 at 10:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Danny
      Danny

      It’s like having the captain on deck telling the remaining crew and passengers to be orderly and united – after the lifeboats have left the Titanic.

      Jan 25, 2011 at 11:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • kayla
      kayla

      Why is it taking so long to certify repeal….? If this thing isn’t certified by Summer I hope Obama catches hell…And I used my first vote EVER to vote for him….I’m not even that liberal on most issues……

      Jan 25, 2011 at 11:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      QUEERTY: “Now is the part where you latch on to ‘starting this year,’ and read in to that Obama’s commitment to certify repeal of DADT before Christmas. And it’s also the part where you talk about how he didn’t mention the Defense Of Marriage Act, or any of your other pet causes.”

      LOL – he signed the legislation a few days after it was passed by congress, which he doesn’t control. He’d be roundly criticized by the Republicans (merely for partisan reasons) if he certifies it before those reporting to him do, as the Republicans would claim he was influencing those decisions. None of us, gay or straight need yet another partisan diversion to avoid working on serious problems (deficits, education, etc.).

      There’s nothing he can do about DOMA – the Republicans in the House of Representatives would never let a repeal pass and he is a president, not a dictator.

      Meanwhile I just listened to the state of the union address (which I skipped during the Bush reign if only because Bush sounded like someone learning English as a third language), and then turned off the radio and turned on a CD after the Republican moron started ranting on some idiotic personal attack, blaming President Obama instead of engaging in a serious discussion about national policy.

      Jan 25, 2011 at 11:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Casey
      Casey

      What more do you idiots want? ENDA and UAFA will not get passed with a Republican house, maybe if you idiots had actually gone out and voted this fall, the Democrats wouldn’t have lost as many seats. Why would gay marriage go through now? A recent poll showed that only 33% of people support gay marriage.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 12:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Danny
      Danny

      Everyone knows the best, most lasting nations are the ones that violate the human rights of millions of people, correct? Wait… that’s not right.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 12:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jack Blair
      Jack Blair

      I was glad to see that both Ryan and Bachmann responded. It’s the beginning of a new tradition, and a welcome one at that. I know, you white Liberals don’t like it, not one bit. Tough toenails.

      But where was the MoveOn.org response?

      Jack Blair
      InfoQuarter

      Jan 26, 2011 at 12:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • whatever
      whatever

      @Jack Blair: I’m glad Bachmann responded. She Palin’d herself. And Ryan? Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

      Jan 26, 2011 at 12:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jack Blair
      Jack Blair

      @whatever: And your problem is — what again?

      Jan 26, 2011 at 12:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Don
      Don

      @Danny: @Danny:

      Actually, that is accurate. The longest lasting empires of the world are the ones that set down the strictest laws of uniformity and systematically rid themselves of anything that dwindled outside the norms. Look at China and Egypt, for example. Ancient Egypt lasted for about 4,000 years and China has a continuing history lasting over thousands of years.

      Not that I agree with that because I don’t. You were actually correct though. Societies that let their people live freely were crushed by the power of those that were organized.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 12:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tjr101
      tjr101

      Speaker Boner has a tortured look on his face, at least he didn’t cry this time.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 12:55 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • whatever
      whatever

      @Jack Blair: You said we white (um, I’m not) liberals didn’t like the two responses. Well I, as a liberal, did. They both came across as doofuses compared to the prez. :D

      Jan 26, 2011 at 12:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Danny
      Danny

      Good point. It is sad however that a relative handful of politicians and religious leaders violate the human rights of millions of people and in the same breath expect them to maintain the rule of law. That is such an oxymoron situation and the anti-thesis of the founding of the USA to begin with. As the Declaration of Independence points out, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness – and “whenever government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.”

      You cannot have a functioning nation of laws when any political party violates the human rights of millions of people. You would think that the countless wars and upheaval in countless countries throughout history would have taught human beings that lesson. You would think the very history of the USA – including the Civil War – would have taught Americans the end results of any such government.

      The Americans who violate the human rights of millions of other Americans would not uphold a nation that violates their own human rights but they somehow expect Americans experiencing human rights violations and their friends and family to do so? That is irrational.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 1:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeffree
      Jeffree

      This “buddy system” of integrating the Dems & Reps took away most the fun of watching the speech: Usually the best part is seeing one half of the room roaring with applause and the other half roller-coastering through stone faces, grimaces and nervous tics.

      Bachmann showed herself to be a A+ wingnut, obviously not adapting her prepared speech to the actual Address.

      ENDA is now a soon to be forgotten dream, and DOMA gets to remain a sign of just how far we are from full equality.

      Time for “us” to think long term on national issues and do whatever we can on state and local rights.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 1:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • You look funny.
      You look funny.

      Some people support Paul Ryan’s policies and some don’t. No intelligent observer thinks he is dumb. In fact, he is regarded as having a command of the facts that rivals Bill Clinton’s in his day. Your prejudices make you look so foolish, and you don’t even know enough to be embarrassed about it.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 1:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Baxter
      Baxter

      @Jack Blair: Paul Ryan is one of the only adults in Congress. Bachmann, on the other hand, is a raving lunatic.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 2:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 15 · You look funny wrote, “Some people support Paul Ryan’s policies and some don’t. No intelligent observer thinks he is dumb.”

      The Republican who spoke on NPR immediately after President Obama’s speech sounded like a complete idiot as he immediately went into a content-free personal attack.

      As I said, at that point I shut it off. If this speaker in fact had something intelligent to say, he should have put it at the start of his “rebuttal”. You simply can’t expect people to sit through a rant in the hope that some intelligent comment might somehow emerge at the end.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 2:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeffree
      Jeffree

      @You Look Funny: &@Baxter: Although I’m registered as a Dem., I thought Ryan’s speech was good in terms of delivery & structure. His points were clear, and he was persuasive…….

      I don’t agree with him on a whole lot of the content, but as speeches go, we’ve hd far worse. if were an actual Speech Cont.est with judges & all, he’d score way higher than Bachman, who gets points deducted for logic, delivery, and organization.

      Her voice alone caused the shelf over the TV screen to warp :-)

      Jan 26, 2011 at 2:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      “”And it’s also the part where you talk about how he didn’t mention the Defense Of Marriage Act, or any of your other pet causes.””
      ________________

      Any of our pet causes?! Was the author of this article straight? How sad that they feel that fighting against discrimination or advancing civil rights for gays are just a few of us and our “Pet Causes”.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 7:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael@LeonardMatlovich.com
      Michael@LeonardMatlovich.com

      Ah, but the devil is in the details—even for Obama, Son of God. The ban is still NOT actually GONE yet and gays are still dying for their country in the military closet. Don’t believe ME? How about:

      SLDN: “Since the President signed legislation, 135 service members and veterans have contacted our legal team for help”?

      JCSC ADM. MULLEN: “The law has not changed, won’t until it is certified; and there’s 60 days after certification [before it’s actually repealed]. And so now is not the time to come out.”

      AND, even assuming it is gone SOMETIME, as Obama said last night, “this year” [a year can be a long time and we’re not even through the first of twelve months], it COULD be reinstated because:

      1. Obama backed Secretary of Defense Robert Gates’ demand in May in demanding that the original REAL repeal bill [which Candidate Obama had promised to personally fight for]—which would have also created a FEDERAL LAW banning discrimination against gays in the military—be shoved up the asses of our allies in Congress. Don’t believe me? How about:

      “Pelosi said the House WEAKENED ITS REPEAL LANGUAGE TO MOLLIFY THE WHITE HOUSE. Military leaders REFUSED TO ACCEPT LANGUAGE THAT WOULD BAR DISCRIMINATION, so the clause was dropped.” – Huffington Post, June 3, 2010.

      Now WHY would Gates be “for” “repeal” of DADT but AGAINST a law MANDATING nondiscrimination? And that doesn’t just mean banning discharges, it means nondiscrimination in assignments, evaluations, etc. But not only is that guarantee gone, after meeting with SEVEN ANTIGAY GROUPS, the Pentagon “study” recommended that gays NOT be given the same protections IN the service as, e.g., blacks have, even after “repeal.” Strange, I don’t remember reading about Truman meeting with the KKK about racially integrating the military.

      2. He’s STILL letting his “Justice” Department fight to block the LCR unconstitutional court ruling which, as retired gay Read Adm. Al Steinman has said is what we STILL need to prevent future reinstatements. WHY would they do that except, again, to appease Pentagon bigots? Don’ believe ME? How about DADT expert and Palm Center Director Aaron Belkin:

      “The Pentagon could easily repeal the ban TODAY if there was the political will. [Army Chief of Staff] Casey in particular is leaving soon and doesn’t want to be known as the Army chief of staff who let gays in on his watch. The foot-dragging is not about some sincere or legitimate sense that the troops need to be trained on how to deal with gays; it’s because they don’t want to be around when the policy happens.” – Washington Blade, January 6, 2011.

      [img]http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs1360.snc4/163256_1394514562543_1822575019_749119_491613_n.jpg[/img]

      Even this “someday,” impermanent “repeal” coulda, shoulda happened in 2009 had Obama not sold his DADT soul to Pentagon dinosaurs. All the phony “implementation” obstacles would be gone by now, and at least open service of some kind would be a fact. But, instead, here we are at the start of his third year in office with NOTHING functionally changed, even tho Gates’ own “study” said that the majority of troops are ready NOW for an end to it.

      So, yes, in addition to not being able to get married the same way the guy whose life a mandatorily still-closeted gay soldier might die saving, if he/she makes it Home, regardless of their service to their country, in most states he/she can still be denied/fired from any civilian job simply for being gay. [And, shhhhhhhh, don’t even mention that transgender ban.]

      In the meantime, Obama wants Harvard, Yale, et al., to start passing out school logo sweatshirts to military recruiters based solely on the promise, “The check is in the mail”? Mary, please!

      But even tho Daniel Hernandez, the gay hero America doesn’t know is gay, didn’t get to sit next to Michelle again, The Gays got their annual SOTU crumb….exactly three months to the day from the next White House Easter Egg Roll when Second Class gay families will cavort with First Class straight families and, yet, still praise His Holy Name.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 8:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael@LeonardMatlovich.com
      Michael@LeonardMatlovich.com

      Sorry about the pic size.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 8:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • whatever
      whatever

      Ryan, the smartest Repub? Isn’t that like calling someone the tallest midget? ;)

      Jan 26, 2011 at 8:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • greenluv1322
      greenluv1322

      @Michael@LeonardMatlovich.com: Great post…you should work for Queerty.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 8:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • divkid
      divkid

      @Don: you are an a-historical fool. china was, and is a largely culturally uniform ethnic group, BUT continually influenced culturally and politically, disproportionately, by outside ideas and traditions: (huns, indian buddhists, tibet, manchus…et al.) china lost out to the west *when* it closed its mind to new ideas outside the “norms” of its uniform society. a mistake it has since rectified. and then some.

      ancient egypt was even less homogenised: (mesopotamian peoples, hebrews, hyskos, sea peoples, nubians, ptolomaic greeks et al. foreign mercenaries, traders, labourers; bringing in outside ideas, gods, cultures, ideologies, technologies, etc; blending to create something bigger — civilisation.

      if civilisation doesn’t change and adapt it dies. as ever its about balance. what you retain verses that which no longer serves a purpose. this is called progress. it applies as much to other cultural artifacts such as religion, or sexual morality.

      you are stupid to speak so authoritatively on something of which you know so little. helping make our enemies points against us. this was history 101. and you fail.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 9:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam [Different person #1 using similar name]

      @B: No, you didn’t want to take him seriously, and guess what? You found nothing to take seriously. Wow…you viewed him through a hostile lens and then found your hostility justified. Shocking! That’s never happened before!

      Jan 26, 2011 at 9:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • divkid
      divkid

      on reflection that came off as pompous, and rather off the main issue.
      forgive.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 9:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JUSTICEONTHEROCKS
      JUSTICEONTHEROCKS

      Most of the morning show analysis has Obama’s speech as dry, nonspecific, and undistinguished, and Ryan’s response as tightly focused on the single crucial issue of the economy, particularly jobs. So I guess we see who the winners and losers are.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 9:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dirk Dasterdly
      Dirk Dasterdly

      @Casey:
      Maybe if the pussy-in-chief and the retarded Democrats made an effort to keep their fucking promises (without activists shaming them into (maybe) keeping one) we’d have gone out and voted. Quit blaming the victim here. Poor Barry and the House Dems aren’t the victims. They took us for granted, now they are paying the price. And they will continue to do so.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 9:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • whatever
      whatever

      @JUSTICEONTHEROCKS: uh, except ryan did not focus on jobs AT ALL.

      yeah, we see who won.

      http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20029581-503544.html

      but, hey some morning show yakkers said otherwise. heh.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 9:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • justiceontherocks
      justiceontherocks

      @JUSTICEONTHEROCKS: get your own screen name. you are the most pathetic kind of troll.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 9:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Whatever
      Whatever

      @whatever: Yes, because I think we all look to CBS as definitive.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 9:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JUSTICEONTHEROCKS
      JUSTICEONTHEROCKS

      Doesn’t matter. He’ll be reelected handily, period. Who is going to beat him?

      Jan 26, 2011 at 10:04 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kyle
      Kyle

      Now let’s continue to bash him guys. It’s more fun when he is the bad guy. That Tea party lady is “coucou”. I can’t believe CNN aired her silly response.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 10:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • justiceontherocks
      justiceontherocks

      @JUSTICEONTHEROCKS: You are infringing on a copyrighted name. Keep it up and I’ll tell Cassandra you are an atheist.

      Really, you don’t have the intelligence or wit to pull this off.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 11:04 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 25 · Cam wrote, “@B: No, you didn’t want to take him seriously, and guess what? You found nothing to take seriously. Wow…you viewed him through a hostile lens and then found your hostility justified. Shocking! That’s never happened before!”

      Try again, Cam. I started to listen to it, but the guy started a series of personal attacks against Obama, blaming him for the deficits that were largely the result of the previous administration (remember, Clinton got us to the point were he actually had a surplus for a change). At that point, I simply shut the radio off and listened to some music while fixing some software I needed.

      It’s real simple – if he had something intelligent to say, he should have stuck to that. Basically, I timed out – I had more important things to do. Obama talked about national policy and didn’t make a single derogatory comment about the other political party. The Republican guy should have done the same.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 4:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      I find it unsettling that monsters like Bohner shed tears for himself while not applauding equality for his gay constituents. The Military Brass sit in solemn ignorance as if their opinions are anything but prejudice and bigotry. The Repuglycunts want to deny education and civil rights to the same people they demand pay for more police. They should be terminated from their positions. Thank goodness it’s all on video for centuries to come.

      Jan 26, 2011 at 4:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • robert in NYC
      robert in NYC

      Actually folks, we should be glad that the likes of Bachmann, Palin et al are out their doing the GOP’s dirty work. They’re going to polarize their party even more to the right which will mean they’ll lose heavily in general elections. With psycho-talkers like that, independents will shy away from voting for a party of hate that supports them. The wheel goes around.

      Kayla, No. 3…I believe there is a 60 day time frame for certification of repeal to take place which I believe is some time in February 2011.

      Jan 27, 2011 at 8:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Soupy
      Soupy

      You’re right, Robert. They just seem to provide clips for parody and scorn. Once they start campaigning, the media will have a full on Christine O’Donnell frenzy.

      Jan 27, 2011 at 9:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • kayla
      kayla

      @ewe: Umm…The Military Brass sit in solemn “ignorance”, because that’s what they always do….It is a tradition….THEY NEVER APPLAUD!!! EVER! Go back and watch the Bush SOTU’s, they don’t applaud then either….I truly cannot believe that so many Americans don’t understand this fact…….

      Jan 28, 2011 at 7:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @kayla: I get that. I noticed Kagan doing the same thing but you know what i mean.

      Jan 29, 2011 at 9:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • QUEERTY DAILY

     




    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.