Sure, the president only had a one-word mention for the gays during his speech at the Buchenwald Concentration Camp in Germany, but it’s more than he had to say about us while speaking to the Middle East in Cairo.
The choice quote: “Also to this day, there are those who perpetuate every form of intolerance — racism, anti-Semitism, homophobia, xenophobia, sexism, and more — hatred that degrades its victims and diminishes us all.” (Full transcript here.)
Indeed, Western Europe is a much more friendly environment for addressing homophobia than the Middle East, where it’s not worth mentioning because it doesn’t exist.
The Gay Numbers
I agree with your post on DADT. I find these posts however a bit said and deranged. You should try harder on getting rid of the Obama Derangement Syndrome. There are legitimate criticisms to be made. Then there are things like this that renders you as completely crazy guy on the train talking to himself insane.
Dennis
Look, another time when Queerty gives Obama a sarcastic backhanded acknowledgement after he actually does the right thing.
Yeah, he should have made gay rights the central focus of his overseas trip and his visit to a concentration camp. After all, around 60,000 gays were murdered in concentration camps, but only 6,000,000 or so Jews were slaugthtered. Priorities, priorities!
Non-assholes the world over, are acknowledging his latest trip as an amazing success, further strengthening our relationships with allies, and opening new possibilities in our relations with Muslim countries. Too bad Fox News, oohps, meant Queerty, can’t see progress when it happens.
Tim in SF
@The Gay Numbers: Then there are things like this that renders you as completely crazy guy on the train talking to himself insane.
I second that.
Alex
Queerty, please don’t listen to the gay apologist who are willing to lick scraps to survive. Keep the pressure on Obama and don’t let up, it’s the only gay this “community” will receive all of the rights we deserve.
The Gay Numbers
@Alex: Have you read my other comments? You come across as retarded to assume anyone who thinks this post is over the top is somehow an apologist for Obama. Grow the fuck up.
J. Clarence
@Alex: I don’t think those who criticize the way Queerty has attacked the president have been apologist, but rather simply pointing out how nonconstructive the rhetoric has been.
While it is important to keep the president’s feet to the fire, the attitude and rhetorical stance Queerty has taken as of late does not seem to be in anyway constructive but simply cynical.
Of course we shouldn’t just lay back and wait for the President to do something–he doesn’t seem very thrilled to open that box yet–but we shouldn’t go on a, frankly, bitchy tantrum.
Queerty isn’t keeping pressure on the President any more so than a right-wing website like World Net Daily that does similar rants. If you have a person or group that is simply being as obstructionist as possible, you are less likely to regard what they are saying with any shred of validity.
Alex
@Alex: I’m no apologist (though, of course, the term is an ad hominem attack, so no one self-identifies as an apologist), but let’s not pretend that this blog is in any sense “keeping up the pressure on Obama.” If one of these bloggers had a White House press pass, and was grilling Robert Gibbs every day, that would make me ecstatic. But he’s not, so instead of bitching, it would be nice if the site would provide some positive discussion on future steps we can take to earn our equality.
The Gay Numbers
@Alex: Or better yet, something like an action item. Things that we could be doing to place pressure on obama. Right now in the healthcare debate you see all these sites pushing hard for people to get involved and contribute time to telling their representatives to support single payer or the public option or whatever. I rarely see this type of activism on a site like Queerty if ever. If you want to produce real change you need this sort of response.
dgz
are there two alexes?
—
anyway, i think mentioning homophobia in the context of the holocaust is actually a pretty big deal.
but Queerty, i don’t expect you to *not* have a slant… but is this going to happen every time obama does something good? for example, if he does do something about DADT, are you still going to spit in his face for “too little too late?”
btw, if you get news tips from readers, a shot-out would be nice. nudge, nudge.
TQE / Adam
Why is there such hatred of Obama?
Realistically what can he do as president? He can’t force congress to pass legislation. He can’t force California’s supreme court to allow gay marriage.
About the only thing he could do is try to end DADT–but if he does that he runs the risk of turning into Clinton. Clinton tried to allow gays in the military and what did it get us? DADT. What did it get Clinton? A republican congress.
Obama has been making the best possible broad moves–say nominating a supreme court justice who is likely to vote our way.
The Gay Numbers
@TQE / Adam: Your post is what frustrates me about this site. On the one hand we have real apologists such as yourself and then on the other we have the Obama Derangement Syndrome. Neither are particularly useful.
D-Sun
@TQE / Adam:
He could easily issue an executive order putting a stop to investigations and discharges related to DADT. That way no more servicemen/women have to lose their jobs while he waits for congress to decide it feels like doing something about this.
Kid A
If he had not mentioned gays/homophobia, he would have gotten shit from Queerty. He did mention gays/homophobia, and he got shit from Queerty.
Huh.
dgz
@Kid A:
exactly. let’s call it his catch 44.
i preferred hil, but even i must admit queerty piles on.
ascarius
I had enough of your negative approach to everything Obama does. I had enough of your obsessive anti-Obama shit! This site in from now on out of my bookmarks list!
InExile
Thank you Queerty for standing up for our rights while we continue to be oppressed by Obama.
InExile
@InExile: Just joking!!!
jason
I think queerty.com is making a perfectly legitimate point. It is perfectly legitimate to point out that Obama seems to target his speeches to an audience. He’s putting politics before principles.
InExile
@jason: Oh yes principals, guess they went out the window after the campaign ended! A few examples: rolling back tax cuts for the top 3% to finance UNIVERSAL health care, closing Gitmo, using the bully pulpit of the Presidency to push for civil unions, DADT, DOMA, ENDA, Hate Crimes, and ending the wars to name a few.
timncguy
@TQE / Adam: Is it intentional ignorance of the facts surrounding DADT that causes these kinds of posts to continue?
1. Oabama has the legal authority given to him by congress to issue an executive stop loss order to halt enforcement of DADT while waiting for congress to repeal the law. These are NOT mutually exclusive actions.
2. The latest public opinion poll for repeal of DADT shows 69% support for repeal. Majority support of repeal exists, according to the poll, in EVERY demograpic group.
3. It’s not 1993 and the Clinton years anymore. There would be no political backlash at all to an executive order or to congressional repeal.
Synnerman
This is why we can’t have nice things.
Richard in DC
Am I missing something here? It seems like the president expressed concern about homophobia in Cairo. Holding our politicians accountable is one thing; but posting negative articles when they do the right thing is absurd. If you keep hitting the dog for no reason, it will turn on you. Not to say that the president is a dog, but to highlight the fact that if we don’t support him, eventually he will assume there is no point in supporting us.
Fitz
I am as critical of him and his followers as anyone I know, but come on… you don’t slam someone for doing what they should do. that’s some no-win fighting. You must have wonderfully stable and fulfilling relationships if you screech at someone for not paying attention to you and then screech again when they do.
osocubano
@Fitz: Then again, some people communicate exclusively by screeching.
The Realist
@TQE / Adam: Likely vote our way?
Nothing in her record indicates that she will, likely, vote OUR way. She does have a record of voting with the conservatives over 90% of the time, but sure, MAYBE she could vote our way. There is no record that she WILL.
Fitz
@osocubano: And aren’t those people a joy to be around?
rhydderch
You know I have been defending Obama since day one but in light of the news today that the adminsintration asked the SCOTUS not to take the case of gays in the military, the gloves are off. Seriously why is it ok to throw the gay a few scraps here and there? Sure he’ll mention gays in a speech or nominate a couple of homos for leadership roles just to show how “tolerant” he is. This man is a lawyer who was attacked visciously for his race and perceived religion and he isn’t don’t jack squat about DADT. Seriously, no one would stand for these slights if this was an issue regarding race but somehow it is deemed acceptable to discriminate against gays. Personally I would never join the military but sure as shit wouldn’t join any organization that openly discriminates with the backing of the US government.
Andrew
Had SCOTUS granted cert, it would not have ruled on the constitutionality of DADT. Rather, if it found in favor of the appellants (the plaintiffs/servicemembers), it would have sent the case back down to the district court. I haven’t read any amicus (not sure what was filed yet), but there’s a good chance the administration was not being “evil” here. Bear with me…. They may have been strategic in avoiding being forced to defend the policy before SCOTUS. As it stands now, the issue lies squarely in the lap of the Administration and Congress (where a bill is pending to repeal DADT). This is where DADT should be dealt with. We need to put pressure on the Armed Services Committee to allow open hearings on the issue and move H.R. 1283 toward passage. The bill has a lot of support in the House (about 150 co-sponsors) and recent polling is in favor of repealing DADT. Congress needs to pass this and put it to the President for signature. IMHO.
CS
Seriously?
I’m totally with you guys on the DADT, your coverage of that issues is fantastic. But this… this is bewildering.
I’m curious to know what you would have wanted Obama to say in his speech commemorating the Holocaust? He spoke about not giving in to the evils of bigotry, he listed homophobia as something we need to be on the watch for… What else should he have done? I understand that if Queerty had its way, every speech Obama gave would be an anti-homophobia tirade, but honestly.
I’d also like to point out that pairing this post with a photo of Obama and Elie Wiesel is a special kind of one-mindedness. Wiesel has spent his whole life fighting against bigotry and persecution and deserves some respect for it.
galefan2004
You don’t think, nah it couldn’t possibly be, that when you are discussing an event that took place, that was based on hatred and intolerance, including a certain pink triangle, that you might just work homophobia into the speech, as compared to when you are talking to a group trying to improve the American image in a country that already hates you.