The dek head for an article by Chris Geidner, who pens the excellent Law Dork blog, reads, “Despite early missteps, granting benefits to the same-sex partners of federal employees is proof he hears us.” What follows is an Obama apologist diatribe filled with “buts” and “excepts,” as in, Obama did screw us over but look what he’s doing for us now! Geidner is a smart guy, and he’s right about one thing: Obama does hear us. But for all the wrong reasons. He’s now simply reacting to our rally cries for equality; he is not taking the proactive steps he insisted he would during the campaign. He will only get us closer to full equality if we cajole, make noise, and threaten to withhold support and finances. This is not new in politics. It often takes such tactics to get things done in Washington. But we’re not talking about health care or Wall Street reform — we are talking about basic civil rights.
It should not take negative coverage in the media or pulling out of DNC fundraisers to have our voices heard, but that’s what it is taking. It’s not our preferred way of dealing with the White House, but that’s the fate we’ve met. Folks like Geidner offer a worthwhile perspective on the debate. But giving Obama a pass for “finally hearing us” is tantamount to endorsing his abuse of our civil rights as a political bargaining chip.
So join Team Obama again if you want. But rest assured, you’re under no requirement to do it.
Rob
Even the National Stonewall Democrats are abandoning the June 25th DNC fundraiser. They’re not “boycotting” it, but they have made a “decision to not promote this event or any other future DNC fundraisers targeted towards the LGBT community at this time.”
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0609/Gay_Dems_complain_DNC_cut_off_funding_drop_support_for_Biden_event.html?showall
SM
Someone needs to start writing articles for blogs all over the internet…Out of the MILLIONS OF GAYS IN AMERICA…how many actually SHOW UP to work of their civil rights issues.
michael
@SM: Whats this fucking obsession you have with how gays are handling the gay rights movement? Do you have a dildo or something that is made in the image of Obama? Bitch your crazy and your obsessed. You have no idea of what the average gay person is or is not doing. Your are on crazy cunt and you need to go hang your fucking self. Believe you me, more gays are taking charge of there destinies than straights are. Just look at issues that straights give a crap about and what happening. Escalating troops in the middle east. Threatening and black mailing countries in order to suppress torture information. Spying on American citizens without court order. Selecting a man who receives more contributions than any other from the health care industry to head up health care reform. Why don’t you go deal with that shit and get over your OCD obsessions with we gay people? Your one sick bitch.
schlukitz
@michael:
She’s a masochist.
She comes on these site and whines about how unappreciated she is in one breath; insults us in the next breath and then revels in all the verbal abuse we lay on her.
Wonder if she fingers herself while we do that?
Or does she sit on a dildo?
Perhaps both?
SM
@michael:
You all are crazy and obsessed. LOOK AT THIS ENTIRE PSYCHO CRYBABY SITE and you call me crazy?
You all claim you supported Obama…you all supported Hillary in the primaries. She lost..that is why you all went for Obama. Obama fought that fight alone.
Stop lying so much when you all attack him.
Democrats need to start calling you all out and how YOU ALL HURT OUR PARTY.
Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
Geidner, there, and even more on his own site, strains at the gnat of alleged overemphasis by some critics of the DOJ brief on references to incest, etc., while SWALLOWING the poison camel that makes up the balance of the brief. THIS lawyer’s analysis is both more balanced and logical, Jon Davidson, Legal Director at that famous Obama Hater group [not] Lambda Legal:
“Whether or not the administration felt a need to defend, there are many ways one can defend. The administration could have rested on the first two arguments raised in their papers (jurisdiction and standing) that these plaintiffs were not entitled to sue without arguing at this point that DOMA is constitutional. Doing that would not have waived those arguments. What they need to be asked is why they gratuitously went out of their way to make the outrageous arguments they unnecessarily included such as that DOMA does not discriminate based on sexual orientation or that the right at issue is not marriage but an unestablished right to ‘same-sex marriage’ or that DOMA is somehow justified in order to protect taxpayers who don’t want their tax dollars used to support lesbian and gay couples (while it’s apparently fine to make lesbians and gay men pay the same taxes but be denied the benefits provided heterosexual couples). Their public statements about the filing try to sidestep these points. They absolutely knew they did not need to make these additional arguments, especially at this time and consciously decided to do so. I am seething mad.”
In now patented and predictable Obambot fashion, Geidner cherry picks facts, ignoring anything that disproves his denials and distortions, desperately grabbing at the thinnest straws.
On his site he defended referencing Obama Best Bud Lawrence Tribes’ defense of the DOMA brief [which he also references at Salon] by pleading ignorance of their relationship.
On Salon he plays cute [read hinting for a roll in the hay with Dustin Lance Black] turning Harvey’s famous reference to a kid in “Altoona, Pennsylvania” into one from…wait for it…Black’s hometown.
Finally, the most ludicrous and invincibly ignorant drool to pour from his mouth is invoking Milk’s name at all in the context of his emotional cry for gays to keep bending over for Big Barack because He luvs us so.
If Harvey were around, Ms. Geidner, Law Dork, Porch Faggot, he would slap the bullshit out of you.
[Sad but believable caption to picture above featuring gay icon Frank Kameny. “Will someone make this old queen let go of my hand?”]
SM
@Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com:
Fine…Start staying away from the Democratic Party. GOOD BYE~
You are the low class freaks who want equality?
SICKOS….
SM
@schlukitz:
So what do all the PSYCHO OBAMA Bashers on this site do for the Democratic Party. How exactly are you lazy fools helping out on other issues? I doubt you are.
You all want soooooooo much when honestly have not done much. You cannot even get a serious equality movement together or treat people who supported you with an ounce of respect. Its all who can be the biggest FOOL and yet you all want us to take you seriously?
How fast you all FORGET that YOU ALL GAVE HILLARY CALIFORNIA AND NEW YORK in the primaires. You all did not help Obama get the Presidential nomination – you know the HARD FIGHT.
SM
@SM:
Right now the Democrats are working on Healthcare. Since all you crybabies think all your civil rights issues HAVE TO HAPPEN RIGHT NOW and are more important than issues like someone not being able to get chemotherapy for their cancer – I suggest you all start helping the Democrats out on OUR issues because sites like these are nothing more than a liabilibty to the Democratic Party.
nokkonwud
“Right now the Democrats are working on Healthcare”…and screwing it up.
InExile
@SM: Hate to say it but Hillary DESERVED New York and California. In fact if Obama had run an honest campaign she would now be our President and we would not be having all these conversations about lack of action from the White House!
osocubano
@SM:
Yeah, they’re working it into oblivion.
Aaron Khan
I’d rather have Obama/Biden in office than McCain/PALIN any day.
Aaron Khan
I still have faith in Obama.
As a proud gay man, I can say there are a lot more issues to resolve FIRST before gay rights. Yes, equality should be standard and human rights should be utmost priority but I would wait if it meant to save our economic system and health system. Obama has time. We have only scratched the surface of his term. He may not work as fast as I want him to, but to sit here and complain would be unproductive. The so called OBAMA COMPLAINERS will still complain even when DADT or DOMA are abolished down the road. Something like, “…well, that bastard took too long.”
InExile
@Aaron Khan: The window to passing anything is about 17 months, then it will be election time again so the longer he waits the less chance we have of passing anything.
Blind faith in ANY politician is not wise. We need to keep the pressure on and the pressure thus far is not enough.
Robert, NYC
What galls me with Obama and even the Clintons is that they use the word equality as if they understand its implications. Equality means having the same rights as everybody else. How can they think that believing in a different form of legal segregation via civil unions which is what the are, is FULL EQUALITY? It seems that they only believe in equality for themselves, the majority, as long as it doesn’t include the LGBT voting bloc, we can have some rights, but not all of them, not when it offends one’s religious beliefs. Its obvious he disagrees with the Warren court decision of which he is a product. I see where this is going. He’s pandering to a two tiered class-ridden society which is in and of itself, segregation. Nice work, Obama.
stephan
We will never be satisfied with whatever this administration does. Let be honest, we hate the guy at the top because he isn’t Clinton/DADT/DOMA, or be honest with your individual selves about why you really have a prob with the guy.
Brian Miller
@Aaron Khan: As a proud gay man, I can say there are a lot more issues to resolve FIRST before gay rights.
As a proud gay man, I reject the notion that socialized medicine, higher welfare payments, more foreign aid for poorly run countries, and soaring government employment are “more important priorities” than the constitutional rights of Americans.
There is no matter more important than the basic constitutional rights of people.
If you don’t have your basic constitutional rights PROTECTED, all the big-government welfare-state fluff that Obama is promoting in health care, employment, etc. doesn’t matter.
So far, Obama has FLUNKED the constitutional rights test. He flip-flopped on FISA and warrantless wiretaps, kept the Abu Ghraib and other torture photos hidden, opposed prosecuting officials who violated US law and tortured people, preserved the Patriot Act, and worked hard to declare that LGBT people have no constitutional rights in a Supreme Court brief.
All of you guys demanding government goodies like “free” health care paid for by other people and “guaranteed employment” are fools. You have NOTHING if you don’t have your rights. NOTHING.
sweetdog
@SM:
LOOK AT THIS ENTIRE PSYCHO CRYBABY SITE
Why exactly do you come on a gay website anyway?
Mark
“Granting benefits…” Please! The right to take care of your partner? President Obama has failed in his leadership as a fierce advocate for civil rights. He’s a joke for promising to lead change and instead has stayed silent until shamed into doing s o m e t h i n g.
KD108
Wait, I’m confused… So if we scream and protest and something (even if it’s a very small gain) actually happens we’re supposed to be upset because it was reactionary (which isn’t exactly true since the federal stuff has been in the works for a while… the timing of announcement is pretty suspect as a move to save the DNC fundraiser) or too little, too late? What if we keep screaming and actually do get something accomplished like repealing DADT and DOMA or getting ENDA and hate crimes passed? Are we still going to bitch and call Obama a douchebag because it didn’t happen in the first 5 months of his presidency? Our leaders should know that this is a civil rights issue and they should act accordingly without us having to scream, but that’s how politics works. Even though it’s what’s right and what we as humans deserve, people who aren’t in the same position aren’t going to think about it usually so we have to make our voices heard. I’ve always felt like its better that something gets done regardless of whether you had to tell someone or if they just do it on their own. At least this administration is even remotely hearing us. I feel like this gets a little ridiculous when if we still had a Republican administration or majority in congress our screams wouldn’t be heard at all, and in addition we’d get anti-gay legislation and a big “fuck-you”.
I understand being frustrated and I understand that this is only a small gain and we need to keep the pressure on, but I feel like no matter what he does it will never be good enough unless he magically morphs into Hillary Clinton after the fact…
We can’t tie this movement to any political party or candidate and if we do invest in them we have a right to hold them accountable. I’m not asking anyone to grovel in thanks as if what we’ve gotten is manna from heaven, but complaining and telling the administration that you have no faith in them ever doing anything (or that anything they will do is too little, too late) isn’t going to be much incentive for them to get anything accomplished if they haven’t really shown their own initiative already.
Brian Miller
@Mark: He didn’t even “grant” all that much. In fact, his “memo” has no force at all.
Kip Esquire says it best…
http://www.kipesquire.net/2009/06/on-obamas-stale-crumbs-for-gay-bureaucrats/#comments
Let’s begin with what exactly the “historic” memorandum is — and is not:
–It is a request by President Obama. Literally: “I hereby request the following…” File that under “bold new leadership…”
–It is not “change.” The memorandum is thoroughly infested with weasel term such as “currently available,” “consistent with,” etc. At best, the memorandum is the equivalent of policy proofreading: Let’s go back and make sure we didn’t miss anything that we were supposed to do in the first place.
–It is expressly worded not to give gays any real tools to work with:
This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
That’s boilerplate that always appears in such memorandums — when they’re meant not to mean anything.
–It is not a “law” by any denotation of the word. It goes into neither the United States Code nor the Code of Federal Regulations. Only the (voluminous but worthless) Federal Register, which is the functional equivalent of the federal government’s scrapbook.
–It is unconstitutional (or would be, if it were an actual law or order rather than a bottom-of-the-cereal-box plastic toy with no real value). More on that below.
–It is not applicable to health care benefits. With the putrid mucus of socialized medicine proposals gushing out of every Obama administration orifice, there’s a definite bit of “fierce advocate” irony there.
—
Let’s go back to why the memorandum, were it at all substantive, would be unconstitutional.
–First, “domestic partner” is not a federal term of art, in either the statutory or regulatory senses, and is therefore unconstitutionally vague. What exactly is a “domestic partnership,” who gets to decide, what kind of notice is given, and is there an appeal process? Again, such questions are mere academic cocktail hour topics, since the memorandum isn’t really a government action in the first place.
–Second, there are equal protection questions. Let’s say you have three similarly situated same-sex couples “covered” (loosely speaking) by the faux initiative:
1. One in Massachusetts, where gays can get married.
2. One in New Jersey, where gays cannot get married but can get “civil unioned.”
3. One in Wisconsin, which has a “no nothing never” bigot amendment.
The one thing that the three couples have in common is that none of them have a “domestic partnership.” If the intent is to extend (already existing) benefits to the couples in Massachusetts and New Jersey, then where does that leave the Wisconsin couple?
Or perhaps the plan is to have an honor code: The federal employee need only fill out an affidavit declaring her loved one to be her “domestic partner.” But that poses equal protection issues too: Why shouldn’t unmarried heterosexual couples be afforded the same option?
Because in, e.g., Wisconsin, straights can get married but gays can’t? Okay — but now suppose you have a gay couple in Massachusetts who choose not to marry but opt instead to declare themselves an (unmarried) “domestic partnership” in order to glom on to the (not) new policy. Are we going to require them to get married to get the benefits? And so on…
Oh, and DOMA is still on the books. If the memorandum actually meant anything, and if anyone actually had standing to sue over it, then it’s fairly obvious that the more potently the memorandum were used, the more likely it would violate DOMA (which, recall, Obama is defending vigorously in court. Ahem…)
Again, this is all angels dancing on the head of our cowardly president. I expect no law review articles, intense blog debates or other elaborate evaluations of these (strictly hypothetical) issues to emerge. But they help illustrate just how pointless the memorandum is. One would normally be tempted to call it “insulting,” but this president has so callously insulted gays so many times already that this latest gesture barely warrants a footnote.
The memorandum does not insult the gay rights movement per se (leave that for the ever-lengthening trail of gay-hostile wreckage — from Rick Warren to the DOMA brief scandal, and likely beyond). Instead, this absurd piece of worthless paper insults our intelligence. This obnoxious, Rube Goldberg inspired non-policy, in which Obama actually finds a way to call nothing “something,” is like two parents letting their kids vote on toppings for the pizza and pretending that the family is a democracy. It’s cute — and strictly fantasy.
Gay apologists for Obama will either fall for it (again), or they won’t. While there have been some “green shoots” (rainbow shoots?) on that front, for now I’ll settle for a well-directed “I told you so…”
galefan2004
@SM: Thank you for your opinion. No one gives a fuck, but thank you anyways.
galefan2004
@SM: I’ve campaigned vigorously for the Democratic party at every single election. I’ve been door to door and made cold calls every major election cycle for the past 4 years. My candidate of choice won both times. Thank you for your opinion though. Maybe you should stick to posting under my name and ridiculing me. Its funnier when you do that, and I’m all in awe of having a stalker.
galefan2004
@Robert, NYC: If civil unions are molded exactly like marriages but called civil unions its the EXACT SAME RIGHTS only the name is different. We need to stop fighting over the name and start fighting over the rights. The majority of the country has supported giving us equal rights under a different name for a pretty decent amount of time. It is the gay community that is helping to lose its own cause in this case by demanding it be called marriage. If that civil union allows someone to see his/her partner that is dieing in a state that currently won’t allow him/her to see his/her partner in the hospital then I really don’t care that it wasn’t called marriage.
galefan2004
@stephan: I have a problem with him because he is Bush-lite. I have many more issues with the way that he is handling the war in Iraq and other foreign affairs, the economy, and basic politics than I do because of how he is handling gay rights. However, because he is black and I don’t like him because of what he has done not because of who he is, I must be a racist. I’m so sick of hearing that shit. Blacks don’t have an eternity long pass to act however they chose just because of how they were treated by this country until 1960.
galefan2004
@KD108: Make no doubt about it. The fact that this is an all Democratic government right now has nothing to do with us being heard. If the government was all Republican it would be the same exact way. They didn’t even have the votes to pass anti-gay legislation the last time they tried with an all Republican congress and Bush in the white house. The reason they didn’t is because REPUBLICANS VOTED AGAINST THE ANTI-GAY MARRIAGE AMENDMENT. The reason they are listening now is that the majority of younger people are educated, and the majority of educated people support gay rights, and the majority of young educated people got Obama into the white house. The old radical right Christians are a dieing breed and more and more of them die every single day, and the majority of their children don’t share their ideals. By the time the year 2020 hits, the Christian right will be the minority not the GLBT population.
Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
@SM:
Suck a razor blade, Retardia.
David
No, we don’t have to give Obama a pass. And we shouldn’t. But we do need to speak up. Write Obama. Write you senators. Write Gillibrand and let her know you support her intentions to introduce legislation to repeal DADT. Obama’s not perfect, by any means, but I still believe, with vigorous pressure from our community, he can help lead us to fuller equality.
stephan
@galefan2004: i never uttered the word black, but you did. why?
Lance Rockland
Obama hasn’t done jack shit for us.
FUCK him and FUCK HRC and Barney Frank for being the “house faggots”.
We’ll get our fucking civil rights without their help!
stephan
@galefan2004: guilty thoughts needs no accusations . you want to be treated fairly? try de-registering from thr kla*n first.
prissysissy
You are right that the LGBT community should not give the President a pass, but rather the keep the pressure on consistently. At the same time, screaming shrilly, getting hysterical, juvenile name-calling, do not do us any favors, but drowns out constructive discussion and drives allies away.
It has been five months and we are already screaming that Mr. Obama has lied to us etc. While the (mostly) silence on LGBT issues from the White House IS cause for concern, accusing the President of treachery is detrimental to our efforts to get him to take us seriously.
Case in point: commenter #31, whose juvenile tone is unfortunately the Queerty standard.
We can be firm, we can demand our rights and hold the Administration (and equally importantly, the Congress) accountable, without resorting to melodrama or hysterics. How many of us can think this through with a cool head and act accordingly?
Cam
@SM: You said “Someone needs to start writing articles for blogs all over the internet…Out of the MILLIONS OF GAYS IN AMERICA…how many actually SHOW UP to work of their civil rights issues.”
________________________________
Oh Please, I know your type. Even if the world was perfect and you got everything you wanted you would still be screaming aboutthe Sky being Blue or water being wet.
Robert, NYC
@galefan2004:
Gale I’ll never agree with you on that, but if civil unions are available for straights who don’t want to get married, then maybe I could meet it half way, but that’s not going to happen. Getting rights under a different name has NOTHING to do with equality, its called legal segregation.
Robert, NYC
@Brian Miller:
Brian, can you explain how someone would get access to health care if he or she lost their entire wealth, job, health insurance?
If conservatives and others are against socialized health care, then they’d have to be against all of the other socialized programs that they use and take for granted such as the public school system, public libraries (many working class republicans use both but never bring up the socialized component); the military, fire department, police department, housing and urban development, medicare, medicaid, FAA, FDA, FCC, CIA, FBI, the list is endless. If privatization is the solution, how would all of these socialized programs be paid for and by whom? Conservatives make me laugh, they’re such hypocrites. I wonder how many of them refuse medicare and other social services once their senior years kick in based on their aversion to any socialized programs, irrespective of their financial status? I guess republican seniors aren’t affected by any of it, they have enough money and can afford everything they need for a comfortable retirement without 401 Ks and TDAs to supplement their “social” security.
MackMike
I just want to take a moment to address some of the hits that SM is taking on this site. SM and I had an exchange the other evening, and we had some disagreements; however, SM stood with us out here in Orange County, CA during the No on 8 campaign, and much of her perspective is shaped through that prism.
While I urge SM to try to better understand our anger, and to allow our community to be angry and use that anger as a catalyst for building a bigger and better movement, I do wish that my gay brothers and sisters would exercise a bit more temperence, and tone done the abuse against her (I’m making an assumption that SM is female, and I may be wrong, but there you have it). I want to explain to you why I ask this favor of you all.
Having fought the same battle on the same street corners and in front of the same churches, I can understand her point of view. Unfortunately for you all, her view is regionally inspired, and if SM reads this, I really hope that she keeps that in mind. Here in OC, very few of us turned out, including those who spoke to me tirelessly of their anger and wish to do something. In fact, I never saw a familiar face at a single rally or canvassing until a few weeks ago, when the CA Supreme Court issued its decision on Prop 8, and many of us gathered at the Santa Ana Courthouse. The numbers of GLBT folks here in OC, who turned out to lend their physical presence and voices to our cause was very thin, indeed, leaving me at the time to ask the same questions that SM asks here.
Of course, OC is a unique area. I don’t think that SM takes this into account, this notion that the gay community here is very disconnected–almost isolated. We don’t have the interconnectedness and intraconnection that more cosmopolitan gay areas have. We have maybe one gay bar, very few churches that welcome us…no real meeting places. Here, in OC, we are a bit alienated from one another, which is sad, and it is something that I wish would change, but it is what it is.
In New York City, Chicago, or even WeHo, the community will come together in a growing snowball of energy, so it is easier to build the numbers to have a greater show of visibility, but SM only saw what she saw here in OC. I know a lot of gay people who live here, and I don’t understand why they didn’t feel personally more motivated to turn out, but I do know that this particular kind of disconnect is geographical in nature.
Anyway, remember that SM did get out there and did stand shoulder to shoulder with us to fight with us for justice. For that fact alone, she deserves respect. Rather than abuse her, I would suggest trying to reach out and better educate her. This is no time to push away one of our supporters, so take some time, get your anger in check, and try to channel it appropriately. This is a great place to hone that skill, and when you get out in the real world, you can exercise in a way that will assure us a greater number of supporters. I’m not saying that your anger is unjustified, and I am not suggesting that you shouldn’t be angry, and I’m just asking that it be used in such a way that our cause is advanced. SM is our advocate, not our enemy….
CHIP
@SM:
The hard fight? You mean, when Obama won caucuses because they lasted forever compared to prior years, that in a working class family, with 2 wage earners, which one do you think had to leave to take care of the kids and make dinner!?! How many of my female relatives didn’t get the right to vote in the primary caususes because the Obama backers purposely ran the meetings way past schedule so that women would leave and thus the women’s right to vote was disenfranchised and Obama benefited.
CHIP
England is always brought up as an example, as what the US should aspire to be like for LGBT rights. England has civil unions, not marriage. But their civil unions have all the rights of a married couple. If we had national civil unions like England I would be perfectly fine with it not being called marriage. If you want a religious wedding, as long as your religious institution is ok with performing a same sex union, you can have your union blessed in a church, temple, etc. If your religious institution won’t bless your union with your partner, well, maybe you should look for another place to worship. I’m sorry to be blunt, but if your religious community doesn’t want you, then find a congregation that does. Your relationship with God or Jesus or Mohammed or whomever should not be predicated on where you worship.
Robert, NYC
@galefan2004:
Like I said in another post, we’ll never agree on the terminology. I look at the bigger picture with regard to the portablity of civil union recognition overseas for those of us whose jobs take us to foreign countries. There are thus far seven countries allowing marriage, that is NOT going to diminish. What if a gay civil unioned couple find themselves in a country that doesn’t even offer civil unions or their equivalent? A straight married couple NEVER has to face that problem. Civil unions will NEVER be the universally accepted gold standard. As more countries offer marriage, its going to make civil unions less relevant and pointless. Believe me, there will be more countries getting on board for full marriage recognition than opting for something similar. Until EVERYONE straight and gay has a choice to enter into a civil union, I’ll forever be opposed to it.
Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
@MackMike:
“SM is our advocate, not our enemy”???
QUOTE: “No. 7 · SM
@Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com:
Fine…Start staying away from the Democratic Party. GOOD BYE~
You are the low class freaks who want equality?
SICKOS….” END QUOTE.
As the saying goes, with friends like this who needs enemas?
edgyguy1426
@InExile: In defense of Obama, I don’t think Hillary ran the most honest campaign. She fudged when reporters asked her if she thought he was a Christian, and if the Obama camp is to be believed, those pics of him in arabic headdress were released by the Clinton camp. Even ex-Clinton people know about Hillary’s ‘kitchen sink’ strategy.
wondermann
I see where SM is coming from and she has some good points. And I understand the anger, however I feel it’s gotten waaaay out there.
Obama has not betrayed us, that’s a bit silly and we should be glad for the steps being made. I do believe that a lot of this stems from the “Hillary lost and I’m mad” peeps. Please get over that and let’s move on. This whole melodrama is getting old
SFNative
@SM:
SM, with all due respect, if Obama’s administration issues a brief that invokes pedophilia and incest as a comparison to same-sex marriage, among so many other things, and Obama responds directly to these elements within this brief with silence, then I will be angry because I love myself too much to think of same-sex marriage as something that should be maliciously treated as such. When you see Obama’s long-supportive cohort Stampp Corbin turn around and blast the Administration in response to this brief, you can realize much more fully the vast and profound implication of this brief and what Obama really has to do now to gain back the trust from the LGBT people, in which his memorandum announcement on Tuesday proved to be not nearly enough. We’re entering into a new age for the LGBT civil rights movement, when peaceful non-violent acts of civil disobedience will become more of the norm and our leaders will speak of demands, not queries, with political retribution if demands are not met. This was how the civil rights for African-Americans were won in 1964, and maybe the LGBT people are now finally and fast learning this lesson. It is going to be a very interest next few months and years, a time when we and future generations decades from now may all look back as a historic time of triumph for not just the LGBT people but for all of America.
edgyguy1426
@MackMike: Thanks for this. I tried to say this yesterday but got shot down. There are posters here gay and straight who think that if they lay in some slurs and hateful language, then that person will a) suddenly see the error of their ways and agree with that person or b) run sulking into some corner never to be seen or heard from again. I don’t see where the trash-talk helps anything and while yes, we do have freedom of speech and are responsible for our own words, they have the power to reverberate far beyond the 4 or 5 lines it takes to spout it off.
edgyguy1426
@Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com: Exactly my point
edgyguy1426
ooops sorry Michael, I don’t know how you got in my above re:
Brian Miller
@galefan2004: If civil unions are molded exactly like marriages but called civil unions its the EXACT SAME RIGHTS only the name is different.
And as long as the Blacks-only school is molded exactly like the Whites-only school it’s the EXACT SAME RIGHTS, only the place is different.
Robert, NYC
@CHIP:
Chip, yes, England does have civil partnerships offering all the rights of marriage without the name, BUT…..they’re not that portable once you leave the UK. If a British gay partnered couple went to live in France for example, all of the rights it enjoys in the UK would not be reciprocated by the French version called PACs that offers a mere handful of rights and nowhere near as many as marriage does, some of which are very important. It would recognize civil partnerships for what they are, but it wouldn’t entitle the couple to the same rights they enjoy in the UK, only those rights that come with the French version which by the way, doesn’t allow couples to adopt children, unlike its British counterpart. So that only proves how uneqal civil unions/partnerships are.
No EU country has identical same-sex couple marriage rights without the name other than Britain except those that outnumber them and which allow its gay citizens to marry, ergo Holland, Belgium, Spain, Norway and Sweden. In the UK, a legally married gay British couple married elsewhere would have their marriage downgraded to a civil partnership upon return to the UK. That again proves that civil unions and marriage are NOT the same thing, no matter how many rights civil partnerships confer. Its not even a question of semantics as some seem to think it is.
InExile
@wondermann: This has nothing to do with Hillary. This man made promises, posted the promises on his website, then posted the same promises on whitehouse.gov, then reduced his promises a few weeks ago on whitehouse.gov, then used offensive language in the DOMA brief.
Promises are promises period. It is our job to hold him and congress to the promises made. If we do not hold them accountable who will? I remember Senator Obama saying “if I am elected I expect to be held accountable” for my promises. So why do you think he should not be held accountable?
Billy Jack
Go ahead and hate your neighbor,
Go ahead and cheat a friend.
Do it in the name of Heaven,
You can justify it in the end.
There won’t be any trumpets blowing
Come the judgement day,
On the bloody morning after….
One tin soldier rides away.
Dave
I said it since the beginning and I will continue to…FUCK OBAMA.
schlukitz
@wondermann:
“Please get over that and let’s move on. This whole melodrama is getting old”
Au Contraire, Monsieur.
In the immortal lyrics of The Carpenters “We’ve Only Just Begun”.
If the dialogue offends you, I would suggest earplugs and searching for another webpage that is more soothing to your sensibilities.
wondermann
In the immortal lyrics of Tom Petty…I won’t back down. This site usually proves that some folks are uninformed. It’s sad.
Also, I will hold Obama accountable, but I will be sensible about it. Throwing tantrums will not get us anywhere
edgyguy1426
@wondermann:
edgyguy1426
@wondermann: *a wink and a nod*
InExile
@wondermann: Cutting off the money $$$ and support might get us somewhere. We have no idea if he will pull through for us, after all he does court the religious right and we are not on the same page with that.
Write your Congess person and Senator and spell it out that if they want our support $$$ we need to see legislation and legislation passed. (DADT, DOMA, ENDA, Hate Crimes, Civil Unions with full Federal Rights)
MackMike
@Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com: I actually meant to address that, and I’m glad that you brought it up, because I had to work and just couldn’t spend much more time posting to this thread.
My apologies for neglecting to say anything about that. SM would do well to cease with the name calling, that doesn’t advance a dialogue at all. My guess is that she is a fierce Obama advocate and is frustrated that we are not seeing the opportunity that his administration is promising; while, of course, we are seeing signs of future broken promises.
I guess my point is, Michael, that we have someone here to did stand on the line for us in Orange County, CA. I grew up in OC, and I understand it. Because I know it well, and because I know the gay community here very well, I can see where SM is coming from on the one hand, but on the other I’m not in complete agreement.
Nevertheless, if we can’t dispense with the name calling and the condemnation in our dialogue with someone who fought for our rights, then what type of inroads can we make? It isn’t just SM, but the respect we show one another as well. We are pros at condemnation and judgement, because we are such victims of it, but we really need to rise above it when we are speaking to one another and would be supporters. We have to figure out a better way of reaching across to one another…we need to educate, not insult.
MackMike
@edgyguy1426: Absolutely!
Brian Miller
@Robert, NYC: Brian, can you explain how someone would get access to health care if he or she lost their entire wealth, job, health insurance?
He’d do what I do when I lost my job in the 2001 recession — look for new employment, cut back on his expenses, and get back on his feet.
Again, I don’t see what being gay has to do with a socialist “what’s mine is mine and what’s yours is mine too” agenda. They should NOT be conflated — a large number of LGBT people don’t need (nor want) central planning and a government medical monopoly shoved down our throats. They have nothing to do with gay issues.
Tony
SM, take your meds honey. Is this website the only place you do not get ignored. Do you need a hug? Go hug a grizzly bear.
Tim in SF
WTF is a “dek head” in the first sentence of this post? It’s not in the dictionary. Google doesn’t know what it is either.