Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register

OPINION: Why Obama Was Smart Not To Include The Gay Agenda In The State Of The Union

First off, let me say that I am not an Obama apologist.

Like most of us in the LGBT community, I don’t think the president has done enough for gay rights. The repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was a step in the right direction, but Obama could’ve gotten a lot more done for marriage equality and other issues in the first two years of his term, when he had the backing of a Democratic Congress.

So is it any surprise that he only said the word “gay” one time in his State of the Union address last night? No. We all expected Obama to play it safe in wooing moderate Republicans in a critical election year.

No rainbows quite yet.

Here’s the context:

Those of us who’ve been sent here to serve can learn from the service of our troops.  When you put on that uniform, it doesn’t matter if you’re black or white; Asian or Latino; conservative or liberal; rich or poor; gay or straight.  When you’re marching into battle, you look out for the person next to you, or the mission fails.  When you’re in the thick of the fight, you rise or fall as one unit, serving one Nation, leaving no one behind.

It’s almost the same exact way he mentioned it in last year’s SOTU: Gays, you deserve the right to serve in the army. Openly.

Yes, we know. We also want the right to marry our partners. Openly.

But I don’t begrudge him this: Look at the Republican candidates—even Mitt Romney said he’d try to outlaw gay marriage on a federal level. We need Obama back in office for four more years just to make we keep the marriage equality gains we have. We’ve got six states, and are on the verge of seven or more.

I believe Obama can make some progress on gay marriage on a federal level if we give him four more years. And the best way for him to get elected is to not make an issue of it right now. He’s got the gay vote. He doesn’t need to pander to us. What gay leaders need to do, in their behind-the-scenes conversations with the Administration, is make sure Obama knows we’re okay with his leaving us out of the campaign—but not out of the agenda.

Do you think an incremental approach is the best for marriage equality and other LGBT issues? Vote with your fingers in the comments.

On:           Jan 25, 2012
Tagged: , ,
    • JAW

      I think he did a great job… plus the 2 Lesbians he had with Michelle said a lot

      and as an fyi… Most of the Gays and Lesbians are happy with what he has done… with the congress that he is working with, he has done TONS for us and for Our VISIBILITY.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 11:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Riker

      The author is right. Obama has probably upwards of 95% of the gay vote. He doesn’t need to pander to us.

      That’s wrong.

      He SHOULD need to pander to us, the same way they pander to latinos, or Republicans pander to evangelical christians. We need to let both parties know that our vote (between 2% and 10% of the population) is up for grabs. Let them scramble over each other trying to show how much our vote means to them, and if they don’t then we’ll stay home on Election Day or vote for someone else.

      The coffers of the pro-gay Republicans in New York are overflowing, and that’s a step in the right direction. Once both parties know that helping us is the politically svvy move, they’ll be more willing to do so.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 12:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Norman

      Let’s give the President a break. We know he is behind us 100%. He used a lot of political capital in getting DADT set aside and he did that with thousands of feet on the ground in war zones. All of the naysayers said it couldn’t be done … but he did it!

      It has been a joy to watch President Obama working in the background on so many matters and attaining success.

      Let’s face it, the Republicans just do not want to see him make any progress and are salivating to get one of their own in the White House.

      We need to back this humble family man who we call our President. He is our friend.

      I am 76 years old, and feel he is the best president I have seen in my lifetime!

      Jan 25, 2012 at 12:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam

      Personally I think that Obama has an attitude from a decade ago, sort of afraid of the republicans, and the idea that mentioning gay will somehow hurt him. It’s the same attitude that caused the Dems to lose seats in the last election. They seemed afraid to be democrats. I think they learned that was the wrong idea, as somebody pointed out here the pro-gay republicans in New York are being flooded with donations because of their vote.

      HOWEVER, Obama did mention us once, which is fine. AND…in spite of him not being as much of an advocate as I would like, what it boils down to in my opinion is this.

      He signed the DADT repeal, Gingrich never would have, and Romney asked Congress to alter the U.S. Constitution to outlaw gay marriage.

      So is Obama all that I could wish for for a gay advocate? No, but is he head and shoulders above the alternative at this point? Absolutely.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 12:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lucifer

      Once this whole election thing is over that is all you will gay this and gay that and I am down with that. I saw the gay Air Force folks there and it was great.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 12:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lucifer

      He speeches give me chills. He has a big COCK on him. I can tell.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 12:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam

      @Norman: said..

      “Let’s give the President a break. We know he is behind us 100%. He used a lot of political capital in getting DADT set aside and he did that with thousands of feet on the ground in war zones. All of the naysayers said it couldn’t be done … but he did it!”

      Look, just because he is much much much better than the GOP alternatives lets not lie shall we?

      The White House flat out said there would be NO DADT repeal, the grassroots went into action and pressured Congress and Pelosi forced the repeal down the White hous’s throat. They didn’t do any camaigning for it the first time and it lost. In return for that and some other issues, Dems lost the House. During the Lame Duck session Pelosi again forced it on them, and this time the White House made some calls.

      But lets never pretend that he was out there leading the charge.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 12:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dorothea from Germany

      @Riker: I completely agree with you.

      @Isaac C: “If you are pro-gay and actually WANT a pro-gay candidate to *win* the White House, Obama is the obvious choice and the only one.”

      That’s not true.
      First of all, Obama is not a pro-gay candidate. He doesn’t even support marriage equality. That’s a clear disqualifier. I would never vote for a politician who doesn’t want me to have equal rights. Obama is only in favour of civil unions. He is an African-American who supports legal segregation. That’s outrageous. He belongs to a group of people that has been oppressed in the past and now he turns around and oppresses others.
      Secondly, the USA does not only have two parties. There are also the Green Party of the United States (http://www.gp.org/index.php) and the Socialist Party USA (http://socialistparty-usa.org/). If all 53 % of US Americans who support marriage equality voted Green or Socialist, then you would get national marriage equality in the twinkling of an eye. But no, you prefer sucking up to the pseudo-left Obama.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 1:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Wingfield

      @Cam: And lets not pretend that gay issues are the MOST important thing in America right now. Who cares if you can get married if there are no jobs. Yes we would love him to just shout to the world he is Pro-gay, march in rallies and beg for gay marriage to be legal but there are more broad things he has to tackle that affect ALL of America, not just gay America.
      I think Obama has done the best he can with the republican gridlock situation and he definitely deserves another four years to finish what he’s started!

      Jan 25, 2012 at 1:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Justin in Oaklawn, Dallas, Texas

      My words won’t be nearly as eloquent and pointed as Mr. Obama’s, so here they are:

      “I believe that marriage is a union between a man and a woman. For me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God is in the mix.” – Barack Obama

      Jan 25, 2012 at 1:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • You otta know

      Hey Queerty… Ahhh Duhhh!!!!!?? Yes we need him inoffice again!!!

      Jan 25, 2012 at 1:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DavyJones

      @Justin in Oaklawn, Dallas, Texas: I’ll respond with Washington State Senator Mary Margaret Haugen’s words in announcing that she’s voting to marriage equality in her state:

      “For me personally, I have always believed in traditional marriage between a man and a woman. That is what I believe, to this day.

      “But this issue isn’t about just what I believe. It’s about respecting others, including people who may believe differently than I. It’s about whether everyone has the same opportunities for love and companionship and family and security that I have enjoyed.

      “For as long as I have been alive, living in my country has been about having the freedom to live according to our own personal and religious beliefs, and having people respect that freedom.

      “Do I respect people who feel differently? Do I not feel they should have the right to do as they want? My beliefs dictate who I am and how I live, but I don’t see where my believing marriage is between a man and a woman gives me the right to decide that for everyone else.”

      Jan 25, 2012 at 3:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • randy

      When we have a whole field of GOP contenders promising to reverse DADT, it would have made good political sense for him to crow about it. First ,about 70+% Americans supported repeal. So any mention of the repeal would be great, especially when you see republicans NOT applauding. That would present to America a clear difference between Obama and the GOP, and what’s a stake.

      Furthermore, by crowing about it, and saying that there have been no problems and that this is what the military wants and approves, it makes it that much harder for them to reverse it should they win the election. But in the short run it would have robbed Gingrinch and Romney of another gay-bashing policy point.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 3:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the crustybastard

      Dear Gays,

      Sorry about what happened earlier, but I can’t, like, hang out and talk to you when, like, the cool kids are around.

      I still like you and stuff, but…well…y’know it is.

      Are we still cool?
      ( ) Yes ( ) No

      UR BFF,

      Did you bring any extra money?

      Jan 25, 2012 at 3:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • R.A.

      OK, so be a moron and vote Republican – fill both houses with them, so they can appoint all the members of the Supreme Court, too.

      Alternatively, you can sit on your hands or vote for a Nadar, and then complain when we wind up with another Iraq, a ruined economy, and all our hard-won battles reversed.

      But at least you’ll feel good about yourself, because you never compromised.

      Just like the Tea-Baggers.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 3:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jim

      Is this website saying that being pro-gay is a losing proposition? I wouldn’t be so sure about that. It seems that being anti-gay is increasingly a loser as time marches forward.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 3:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt

      What it will take is having both real parties WANTING us, or at least our supporters. That may happen in 2016, and is fairly certain by 2020 unless something major happens in the meantime, but we’re not there yet. So for now we have to choose between someone who will fight against us tooth and nail every step of the way, or someone who might help a bit now and then but mostly stands to the side. Being pandered to may be nice, but without it there’s still no contest so far as I can see.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 5:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt

      @Jim: Not entirely a losing position… but the most advantage is not in being all-out emphatic pro-gay, which would push away those nearer the fence, but in being just enough so to be clearly a better choice for those who are than the opposition.

      I’d still like to see what a second-term Obama paired with two at least mildly cooperative houses would do.

      Of course, I wonder what else (if anything) might have been done in the 2009 Congress if health care hadn’t bogged things down. Then again, perhaps it was intended to. I hate politics.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 5:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Justin in Oaklawn, Dallas, Texas

      @DavyJones: Hey, DavyJones… I think I’m misunderstood! I was pointing out Mr. Obama’s position in Mr. Obama’s own words… NOT my position! I married my own partner of 21 years this past July 24th in Queens, New York (of course, violating Mr. Obama’s narrow definitions of the words “marriage”, “Christian”, and “God”.
      This Mary Margaret Haugen sounds like my kind of presidential candidate!

      Jan 25, 2012 at 5:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Justin in Oaklawn, Dallas, Texas

      @DavyJones: Hey, DavyJones… I think I’m misunderstood! I was pointing out Mr. Obama’s position in Mr. Obama’s own words… NOT my position! I married my own partner of 21 years this past July 24th in Queens, New York (of course, violating Mr. Obama’s narrow definitions of the words “marriage”, “Christian”, and “God”.)
      This Mary Margaret Haugen sounds like my kind of presidential candidate!

      Jan 25, 2012 at 5:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Queer Supremacist

      Unlike you fucking kapos, I’m voting for an actual gay marriage supporter.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 5:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      No. 8 · Justin in Oaklawn, Dallas, Texas wrote, ‘My words won’t be nearly as eloquent and pointed as Mr. Obama’s, so here they are: “I believe that marriage is a union between a man and a woman. For me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God is in the mix.” – Barack Obama’

      … except that Barak Obama also opposed California Proposition Eight, which put a ban on same-sex marriages in the state constitution, on the grounds that constitutions normally give people rights rather than taking rights away.

      When you put both together, Obama was clearly distinguishing personal beliefs (that might in fact be what he thought the voters wanted him to believe) from the official actions he would undertake as president.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 6:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt

      @B: Careful with that “making sense” business. Someone’s liable to start calling you nasty names for it.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 6:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mike

      Ah yes….a politician to the end. 4 more years? NO!

      Jan 25, 2012 at 6:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Markie-Mark

      In the 2008 primaries there were 2 candidates for the democratic presidential nomination who were in favor of marriage equality. Most lgbts voted for either Hillary or Barak (both of whom are against marriage equality). Also, the Green Party has had marriage equality in its platform since 1990. You deserve to get what you vote for.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 7:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rainfish2000

      “The President has spoken out in opposition to Proposition 8 because it is divisive and discriminatory. He will continue to promote equality for LGBT Americans,” the White House said Wednesday night after the ruling and tried to clarify its position the following day. “The president does oppose same-sex marriage, but he supports equality for gay and lesbian couples…” Aug. 2010



      “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages,” Illinois State Sen. Obama said in an answer to a 1996 “Outlines” newspaper question on marriage — before he became a lying, backstabbing, spineless weasel as President.



      Obama’s head of Office of Personnel Management, John Berry, the highest-ranking out gay official in this administration was ordered last year (by Obama) to ignore a federal court order to allow GLBT federal employees to buy health insurance from the federal government for their partners.

      President Barack O’Bush has no sense of decency or shame whatsoever. So go ahead, give him a pass, Obots. If your “only” choice is the “lesser of two evils” guess what — you are still left with evil. He wont change unless he has to earn your respect and your votes. But then, you get what you deserve if you always play a needy bottom to an indifferent top. Sad. Very sad.

      SOURCE: http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/14300/wh-defies-court-order-top-openly-gay-officials-dept-seeks-to-bar-partner-health-benefits

      Jan 25, 2012 at 8:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Re No. 24: the ‘about’ page on your “SOURCE” (the last URL in No 24) states, “The Blend was launched back in July 2004, and I created it to let off steam about the upcoming election and the state of issues that affect my life as an out lesbian.”

      Let’s just say that this does not give the appearance of being a reliable site – letting off steam is not a prerequisite for competent journalism. You really need to validate what that “source” claims.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 8:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt

      @Rainfish2000: This is politics. “No evil” is rarely if ever an option at this level. The choices are always a matter of types and degrees of evil.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 9:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Zach E

      I’ll vote Republican when Rick Santorum finally comes out of the closet.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 9:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason

      Obama is going to lose the election because he’s lost a lot of the middle-class vote and he’s lost a lot of the gay vote. Gay people won’t vote for a man who lied through his teeth about being a fierce advocate for gay rights. He just wants our money and our votes.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 9:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ronbo

      With as President like Obama we don’t need Republicans. Yes, he signed one piece of legislation that over 85% of the population supports. But, beyond that, he has been dragging his feet against the will of the public.

      Obama is to the gay community as Himmler was to the gay community. History repeats itself when you fail to follow the facts.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 10:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • R.A.

      “Obama is to the gay community as Himmler was to the gay community”

      You are beyond insane.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 11:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the crustybastard


      Yeah, “field a candidate that I can vote for in good conscience,” is just too goddam much to ask of either major party.

      And you also don’t seem to understand that I don’t get to vote AGAINST anyone. The only vote I’m allowed to cast is an endorsement. Yet I cannot endorse ANY candidate who does not believe I am his equal.

      So it’s really this simple: equality earns my vote. If your position on equality isn’t substantially distinguishable from the Republican, I’m no more likely to vote for you than I’d vote for that Republican.

      No, I won’t compromise that.

      Some people are willing to put principles over party. Not you, of course. But some.

      Jan 25, 2012 at 11:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Isaac C

      @the crustybastard: If everyone had an attitude like yours, Rainfish’s, Ronbo’s, etc., no progress would be made at all because pro-gay candidates would never get elected.

      I really consider you all no better than GoProud gays who vote for anti-gay candidates all the while claiming they are pro-gay and want pro-gay legislation. A vote for someone you KNOW has no chance of getting to the White House, no matter how pro-gay they are, is a vote against the future of gay equality and rights, IMO. Deep down, you know this to be true.

      Either you get that Obama is 1) the strongest candidate for gays, and 2) that he is the *only* candidate that has a chance of getting into the White House, or you do not. If you don’t, or otherwise refuse to accept reality, I hope you’ll be happy with whomever on the GOP ticket gets to the White House, because you will have NO reason to complain if it does turn out that way, since you would be, in effect, partially responsible for putting an anti-gay Republican there.

      Good luck.

      Jan 26, 2012 at 12:07 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rainfish2000

      @B: You shouldn’t comment unless you have read the article fully. “Pam’s House of Blend” uses thorough documentation and reliable sources. The link I gave has many of these. I suppose you don’t consider TIME magazine “validate” enough for you, eh.

      Such as:

      “In a report by TIME mag, this “fierce advocate” administration makes what has to be the most DOMA-paranoid, politically homophobic decision on this case.

      The [court] order was not published, and garnered little or no notice at the time. The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts moved to comply with the judge’s ruling, submitting [federal employee] Golinski’s insurance form to Blue Cross Blue Shield, and the case would have probably gone away – had the Obama Administration not stepped in.

      “After the AO submitted Ms. Golinski’s form, I thought this matter had concluded,” [Judge] Kozinski wrote. “The Executive Branch, acting through the Office of Personnel Management, thought otherwise. It directed the insurance carrier not to process Ms. Golinski’s form 2809, thwarting the relief I had ordered. I must now decide what further steps are necessary to protect Ms. Golinski and the integrity of the Judiciary’s EDR [employee dispute resolution] plans.”

      SOURCE: http://pamshouseblend.firedoglake.com/2009/11/30/wh-defies-court-order-top-openly-gay-officials-dept-seeks-to-bar-partner-health-benefits/


      The fact of the matter is that OBAMA did and has done the exact same thing that GW Bush would have done — i.e., challenge every effort in the courts that we have made which found favorable adjudications regarding our civil rights. When we won, Obama and his lackeys at the DOJ just kept appealing and appealing and appealing those decisions — instead of letting any federal court decision in our favor stand.

      After two years of having a Democratic controlled congress (Nancy Pelosi wanted OBAMA to leave those pro-Gay court decisions stand (DOMA, DADT, Federal Benefits, Immigration Rights, etc.) so the Dems wouldn’t have to deal with us directly politically, but what does our “fierce advocate” Obama do — he still challenged those decisions, just like any homophobic Republican would do. But then when the Republicans were in the process of taking control of the HOUSE, he stopped his appeal of DOMA, and then quickly cobbled together a weak repeal of DADT with all of the essential non-discrimination language stripped out of it, of course. Wow! Obama is such an obvious asshole. And you still “love” him? Sounds like the worse case ever of “battered-wife syndrome” to me.

      Obama has proven his contempt for the GLBT community time and time again. Not only did he refused to push a Democratic congress in our direction when he had the opportunity to make a difference, but he also fought us tooth and nail in the federal courts — even after we won favorable court decisions. Would he had done the same if these were race or reproductive choice issues — I highly doubt it. Still, there are many in the GLBT community who are just plain ignorant when it comes to Obama’s REAL record on GLBT rights. Pathetic. …Just pathetic. So much for Gay “Pride”.

      Many of you laugh with derision at the moronic herd mentality of the “my side can do no wrong” arrogant attitude of those GOP cult followers — well, how about looking in the mirror sometime.

      Jan 26, 2012 at 12:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • hyhybt

      @the crustybastard: “And you also don’t seem to understand that I don’t get to vote AGAINST anyone. The only vote I’m allowed to cast is an endorsement” is practically the definition of making a distinction without a difference. In what amounts to a two-option race, supporting one IS opposing the other and vice versa.

      Jan 26, 2012 at 12:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ronin

      @Rainfish2000: Like others have said… it doesn’t matter what your personal issues there will never be a president who can fight for EVERYTHING everybody in America wants. Did Obama start out with pretty closed views on gay issues… yes. Has he opened those views… YES. But it probably doesn’t matter what any of us say to you… so just vote Romney/Santorum/Gingrich cause I’m SURE they will make MONUMENTAL strides in gay rights :::sarcasm::

      Jan 26, 2012 at 12:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      No. 33 · Rainfish2000 wrote, “@B: You shouldn’t comment unless you have read the article fully. “Pam’s House of Blend” uses thorough documentation and reliable sources.”

      If there is “thorough documentation and reliable sources,” then you should have been able to cite those, which you didn’t do. Rather you quoted some random person’s statement about what was in TIME, without a citation to the Time article (no issue, date, page number, author, etc.) You are assuming the article you quoted represented a Time article accurately, but that is mere conjecture on your part as you evidently could not find the original material (at least, you did not give any indication that you had).

      Just because you found some random statement on a web site does not mean it is true.

      Jan 26, 2012 at 1:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DonsterNYC

      What on earth gives here…any gay supporting any viable Republican candidate must be confused about what is at stake for our community…every Republican candidate (Karger excepted) has declared war on us…some advocate making us criminals, others maintain that the Bible okays the right to bully us in the classroom, another has given millions to anti-gay terrorist groups and not one will admit that we have ever been discriminated against…whether you believe the president has done enough for us or not, the alternatives are totally unacceptable…more than that, something far more important is at stake in this election…the president in the next term will likely nominate the man who will replace Justice Kennedy who is very likely to retire in the next four years…he is the swing vote on many social issues decided on a 5-4 decision…allowing a Republican the opportunity to nominate his replacement will be a disaster for LGBT equality rights for the next decade…we still must admit that this president’s administration has done more for LGBT rights than any before him even with a do nothing Congress…we must rally the forces!

      Jan 26, 2012 at 1:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CBRad

      @Rainfish2000: Pam’s House Blend lost all its credibility when she tried to jump on the John Edwards bandwagon and use it as her train to fame. She also cuddled up with that man-hating Amanda Marcotte for that one. (And, boy, did it backfire). Besides, Pam looks like one of the Campbell’s soup kids, just not as friendly.

      Jan 26, 2012 at 2:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rainfish2000

      @ronin: Surely, you can come up something more original than “if you don’t vote for Obama, then you love either Mittens or the Grinch and want to become his third mistress”. Really? I’m sorry, but that is just sooooo cliche.

      If President Lyndon Johnson, in the mid-1960s (when Obama was but a child) had felt that people like Obama were not “worth” the political capital to push the 1964 Civil Rights Act for Black people through Congress, then there most likely wouldn’t be a “President” Obama today. But Obama rightfully took advantage of those political sacrifices that a White Southern Democrat made in order to make it a more perfect union for Obama and the 13% of the population that is African/American. Consequently now, all of this begs the question: would Obama ever give more than carefully couched and insincere lip-service for segregationist-style quasi-Civil Rights for GLBT Americans? Have our ethical standards and minimum requirements in a leader sunk so low?

      President Johnson told a colleague after the titanic pull and influence he used to get the 1964 Civil Rights Act passed (mostly by Northeaster Republicans) in a hostile Congress dominated by segregationist blue-dog Southern Democrats that “…because of this, the Democrats have lost the South probably for the next generation — but it was the right thing to do.”

      Now, ask yourself this question: should GLBT American citizens (of all races and genders) really ask for less than what Obama expected from President Lyndon B. Johnson forty-eight years ago in regards to his own thin demographic slice of the American pie? If your answer is yes, then you really have very little pride in your own person-hood nor any compassion for your fellow GLBT brothers and sisters. My god, we have already shoved America a decade into the 21st Century and people are still arguing whether or not tens of millions of fellow Americans should have the some basis human rights as other Americans. Disgusting is too mild a word to describe this farce.

      I don’t care what GLBT Civil Rights affirming or non-affirming politicians you vote for — that is your vote, and like mine it is a matter of personal choice and conscience. But don’t blow Obama’s horn for him like some weak-willed enabler who looks the other way when his “man” does all the wrong things. You’re not doing anyone a favor by doing that. Obama must be held to account just like any other politician. We hired him, we can fire him. If he does not represent our interests, then he is not a viable candidate.

      If Obama is afraid of being called a homo-lover (they had a similar word for that in the South for Pres. Johnson when he supported equality for Blacks) then Obama is not our champion; he is not even a person worthy of the dignity of the Presidency with its honorable hall of real leaders who, as President Johnson, “…did the right thing” because it was the right thing to do — even if it meant losing popularity. Future generations honor men and women who had the courage to swim against the tide of public opinion because tomorrow never changes if you don’t start that change today. It is said that “Fortune favors the brave”, but so does History when your story is finally told. That’s called a legacy. So far, none of our recent presidents have much to boast about in the area.

      Obama rode into office on the backs of other people who made great sacrifices in the past so that his own future could be more secure. Should anything less be demanded of him by the GLBT community now that he is in a position to influence history in order to garner respect for our dignity as human beings and our equality as American citizens as well? President Johnson did not need to have a proverbial stick constantly poking him in the posterior in order for him to move quickly and boldly forward on Civil Rights for African-Americans — the moral convictions he needed to do so was already woven into the fabric of his being.

      Unfortunately, Obama lacks those moral convictions, as well as the vertebrae necessary to stand up for anything in the face of the least opposition. Obama, the great orator, has never really effectively used the bully pulpit of the Presidency, like Ronald Regan, and took it to the people when he needed to move an Opposition Party controlled Congress in the right direction. Obama has more in common with Neville Chamberlain (look it up) than with either Reagan or Johnson. Obama is no leader, it becomes more and more apparently every day that he just wanted to be the Prom King in order to prove something to himself. …More’s the pity. He could have been so much more.

      It’s so sad. The last three presidents we’ve had reminds me of the three main characters in The Wizard of Oz: Bill Clinton (the Tin Man with no heart); GW Bush (well, that’s obvious, the Scarecrow with no brains), and now Barrack Obama (the Cowardly Lion with no guts). I could throw the Speaker of the House in as the Wicked Witch of the mid-West and his band of Republican Flying Monkeys too, but I’ve exhausted the analogy. Oh well, what’s a friend of Dorothy to do?

      Jan 26, 2012 at 2:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      No. 37 · DonsterNYC wrote, “What on earth gives here…any gay supporting any viable Republican candidate must be confused about what is at stake for our community.”

      Keep in mind that a Republican shill could be trying to get gays mad at Obama. When you represent the top 0.1% at the expense of everyone else, you’re best bet is to get everyone else fighting among themselves.

      The Republicans represent the CEO class, and even gays in this class may not mind a homophobic campaign as long as it is just marketing. The Republicans have a history of spewing anti-gay rhetoric during elections and then dropping it afterwards – it’s the people who provided the bucks that they want to pay off, not mere voters who can afford only small contributions.

      Jan 26, 2012 at 2:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rainfish2000

      @B: Since you’re too lazy to look it up for yourself and, at the same time, hypocritically refute my sources — I made it easier for you.

      Check it out:

      Wednesday, Nov. 25, 2009
      California Judge Challenging Obama on Gay Rights
      By Michael A. Lindenberger

      “Obama Administration lawyers are likely still scratching their heads over how to respond to an extraordinary ruling in San Francisco. Last week, the chief judge of one of America’s most prominent federal courts ordered an Executive Branch agency to stop interfering with a court employee’s efforts to secure health insurance coverage for her wife.”

      …You can read the rest of the article at the link below:



      PS – Next time, do some research yourself before you accuse others of not doing theirs.

      Jan 26, 2012 at 3:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Re No. 41, “Since you’re too lazy to look it up for yourself and, at the same time, hypocritically refute my sources — I made it easier for you.”

      First, I did not “refute” your sources (but you now did) – I stated that you did not provide any (until 41, where you at least provided a reasonable citation, although it missed standard things like page numbers). Unfortunately for you, your quote in No 41 does not imply the statement you attributed to your “source” http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/14300/wh-defies-court-order-top-openly-gay-officials-dept-seeks-to-bar-partner-health-benefits in No. 24 which (according to you) claimed that “Obama’s head of Office of Personnel Management, John Berry, the highest-ranking out gay official in this administration was ordered last year (by Obama) to ignore a federal court order to allow GLBT federal employees to buy health insurance from the federal government for their partners.” The Times article you cited never mentions Berry, nor any directive personally issued by President Obama. Rather, it simply stated that the administration was trying to figure out how to respond to the judge’s ruling.

      So, just as I said, you did not (so far) provide a reliable source to back up your statements – an alleged order from President Obama to a person who reports to him is not, after all, textbook material.

      I also might point out that your “do some research yourself” statement shows that you don’t understand what research entails: if you make a claim, it is your responsibility to justify it. People throw out bogus statements as facts all the time, and it’s a lot easier to make up some statement than to try to show that it was never made anywhere. Your belligerence when asked for a legitimate source, however, is a pretty good indication of how reliable you think your statements really are.

      Jan 26, 2012 at 1:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Corey

      It’s really disheartening to read that so many people on queerty do not realize that America is a two party system! You are throwing your vote away and jeopardizing any sort of equality that can be brought on by a democrat in office by voting for a third party candidate. That vote you threw away could be the one to keep a repub out of office who HATES YOU.

      Jan 26, 2012 at 2:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FYI

      @No.42 “B”: Oh girl, get over it. You were wrong, be woman enough to admit it. Obama used his so-called Justice Department to screw us at every turn. Quit lying.

      Jan 26, 2012 at 6:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      No. 44 · FYI wrote, “@No.42 “B”: Oh girl, get over it. You were wrong, be woman enough to admit it. Obama used his so-called Justice Department to screw us at every turn. Quit lying.”

      You are the one who is lying. I stated that Rainfish2000 did not produce a valid source for a statement he quoted. He didn’t, and when he tried, he failed. Maybe he’ll try again, but so far, he hasn’t been able to back up what he posted – its not like the blogger he quoted had personally interviewed someone in the white house and there was no link to original material justifying what was claimed in the post in question.

      In case you actually are too stupid to know, pointing out the lack of proof for a statement does not mean the statement must be false. It means the statement is simply not proven and cannot be trusted. To make any real progress on gay rights, the first thing you need is accurate information about what is going on. If you make decisions based on your delusions, you end up invariably shooting yourself in the proverbial foot. Is that what you want?

      Jan 26, 2012 at 8:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FYI

      @B: Of course, like a good troll Obot you employ willful igorance to avoid addressing Obama’s indefensible record on Civil Rights and the numberous cases listed by contributors here which clearly expose Obama for the betrayer and homophobic a-hole that he really is.

      As has been stated before, what did Obama do in trying to uphold DADT and DOMA that Bush wouldn’t have done? His not defending DOMA now only came after he was defeated in federal courts several times and ONLY after the Dems lost control of the HOUSE of Representatives. If he would have thrown in the towel when Nancy Pelosi was Speaker, then DOMA would have been dead now and millions in the GLBT community would be much better off. But you and your ilk still try to pretend that Obama did nothing to harm us.

      Nothing worst than blind zealot. You can shill all you want for that scumbag in the White House but facts are facts, troll.

      Jan 26, 2012 at 11:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      No. 46 · FYI wrote, “@B: Of course, like a good troll Obot you employ willful igorance to avoid addressing Obama’s indefensible record on Civil Rights.”

      Are you just pretending to be an idiot or are you really one? As I said, Rainfish2000 did not produce a valid source for a statement he quoted. It’s all discussed in detail above. Go back and read it 50 times until it sinks into your thick scull.

      So, now you try a conspiracy theory in an effort to avoid the issue that the claims being made have not been justified. If you want to claim that Obama gave John Berry a direct order, you should be expected to be able to cite an official memorandum of some kind, or at least a direct quote made during an interview. Neither you nor your “friend” have been able to produce either.

      You guys are acting like Gingrich-style Republicans – the figurative bomb throwers who will say anything with no regard to the truth.

      Jan 27, 2012 at 12:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FYI

      @B: We all know that you are not pretending to be a moron, because you really ARE a moron. And apparently very proud of it too. A typical Uncle Tom Obot mole working the Gay New sites.

      Nice how you divert attention away from your inability to refute any of the facts involved in how Obama used his so-called Justice Dept. and his lackey homophobe AG Holder to put as many road-blocks in the way of our civil rights as he could — just like George Bush would have done. Obviously, this must not include your civil rights of course, because you are either another hateful breeder trolling this site or Obama’s personal enema bag since you admire all the shit that he has thrown at us in the GLBT community for so long; that is, those of us who are not pathetic self-hating enablers like you.


      “Fred Sainz, vice president for communications at the Human Rights Campaign, a leading gay-rights organization, praised Obama’s record on gay issues but said he is troubled by the president’s comments about states deciding whether to legalize gay marriage.

      ‘The problem is there are 41 states where (same-sex) marriage is illegal,” Sainz told POLITICO. “The conversation has been concluded in those 41 states.’

      In those states, “that discrimination has been enshrined,” Sainz added. “So it’s incumbent on the federal government to reverse that discrimination.”

      Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/58081.html#ixzz1keN5YGIA


      So dumbass Number 47 “B”, every negative thing Obama and his sludge on Capital Hill in Washington DC has done and continues to do to us profoundly affects our lives and our civil rights. Perhaps even someone with as limited a mental capacity as you can see that even if Washington State is the 7th state, that only leaves a few states left that will ever even have the possibly of passing marriage equality without federal court intervention.

      Look at the map at the link below, then tell me how Obama’s “let the state’s decide” repulsive segregationist attitude would work. Obama’s no different than NJ Republican Gov. Christie. But you, in lemming-like fashion, are too blinded by party-loyalty to see that? How pathetic.


      Jan 27, 2012 at 5:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FYI

      Correction: A typical Uncle Tom Obot mole working the Gay News sites.

      …but, then you already know that don’t you?

      Jan 27, 2012 at 5:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Re No. 48 & No 49: “FYI” needs to grow up and cut out his infantile trash talk, spewed simply because he wants to cover up the fact that he or his friend are putting out statements that they cannot back up. As was pointed out, in No. 24, Rainfish2000 posted a claim (citing a dubious web site) that Obama had ordered John Berry to ignore a federal court order. I merely pointed out that his “source” was dubious and that the statement needs to be backed up with a citation to a credible source – a memorandum or a direct quote from someone who was there at the alleged time.

      Neither “FYI” nor Rainfish2000 liked that, and “FYI” is now reduced to infantile trash talk, merely to cover up the fact that what was claimed was not substantiated (and apparently could not be given that no citation backing up that claim has been provided so far). The claim is not particularly believable – presidents do not generally micromanage at the level claimed as they have more important issues to deal with. It’s as believable as a claim that the CEO of General Motors personally ordered the use of a particular gasket supplier – a low-level decision that a CEO of a major company would never bother with.

      Jan 27, 2012 at 2:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FYI

      @B: “B” is too mentally impaired to read the numerous articles written in major newspapers and magazines, which were cited, that delineated Obama’s dismal record on GLBT rights. A typical troll shilling for Obama.

      Jan 27, 2012 at 5:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      In No. 51, “FYI” lied and otherwise dissembled by claiming there were citations when the only two given for the issue in question (whether Obama had given Berry a direct order)
      were (a) a blog which provided no citations for its claims and a Times article that never mentioned Berry. He’s also trying to switch the topic to his hallucinations about Obama’s record on LGBT rights (which he termed “GLBT” rights).

      That raises another question. While two letters could be transposed accidentally, “FYI” has done this in multiple comments. One reason for not knowing the acronym is being a possibly homophobic Republican shill who is posting nonsense on a gay web site in the hopes of reducing support for Obama. That would certainly fit his childish name calling and infantile personal attacks – just look at what passes for a civil discussion in the Republican primary.

      Jan 27, 2012 at 7:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hyhybt

      @B: When did either GLBT or LGBT become unacceptable? I’ve seen both very frequently, though LGBT does seem more common in print. (I’ve heard GLBT more often in speaking.)

      Jan 27, 2012 at 9:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FYI

      @B: Typical troll nonsense from “B” who obviously has his/her tongue jammed so far up Obama’s “B”-hind that he could floss his teeth with it. Also, it is pretty stupid (not to mention, mentally ill) of you to think that using GLBT instead of LGBT is “proof” of some kind of “republican conspiracy”. What a paranoid fucktard you are. Now piss off and crawl back into POTUS’s anus like the good little self-hating homophobic lap dog that you are.

      Jan 27, 2012 at 11:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      No. 53 · Hyhybt wrote, “@B: When did either GLBT or LGBT become unacceptable? I’ve seen both very frequently, though LGBT does seem more common in print.” I didn’t say it was
      unacceptable. The point was that it is unusual – at least in print. When you couple an atypical acronym usage with the incredibly hostile reaction of that “FYI” moron to the idea that you should not make accusations about people that you can’t back up, you’ve got to wonder if the guy doesn’t have an agenda of some sort. “FYI” is not behaving rationally unless he is a political operative, whether paid or not, who is trying to get a particular result, the truth be damned.

      Re No 54: see above comments. Hint to “FYI” – if you don’t want to be suspected if being some sort of shill or attack dog, then simply state that your responses are based on an emotional problem. It would be even better if you indicated that you are seeking treatment.

      Jan 28, 2012 at 1:01 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FYI

      @B: Oh, “B” hole, you are such anal retentive Obsessive Compulsive. Get some professional help soon. What a predictable moron and trite bore you are. Being Obama’s ass-wipe and excusing his steamy dumps on the GLBT community (got it, GLBT community — not a republican front group) only makes you look like a fool. Move along troll…just move on. Your boot-licking hero worship of an unworthy a-hole like Obama is just getting really embarrassing.

      Take your meds and go back to bed with your cats, you supercilious cretin.

      Jan 28, 2012 at 3:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • f y i

      @B: Apparently, “B” got her retarded head stuck in her “b-hind” again. Yep, projection is a good description for you. Obviously, “B’s” BS defense of Obama is the result of being either a paid or volunteer political shill for the Democratic Party (yes, the DEMS have them just like the Republicans do to troll sites like these) or the “B-otch” is simply mentally disturbed in a stalker-ish kind of anally compulsive sort of way.

      If it is the first case, “B” needs to quit being childish and stop being Obama’s personal enema bag, and if it is the second case (which I suspect as well) “B” really needs to see a professional mental health care specialist immediately.

      Poor “B”, now that Oprah’s gone, you only have your cats and your jumbo size bag of potato chips to keep you company — along with your aversion to the truth.

      Jan 30, 2012 at 1:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      @ FYI…I apologize for being such a douche bag. Obama really is a scumbag on our civil rights. I admit that I was just too lazy to do my own research and I blamed others here for sources that I didn’t even check out. I realize that Obama screwed us royally on DOMA and even on DADT (look how many Gay and Lesbian soldiers were thrown out of the military during his first two plus years in office). Please forgive me “FYI” and everyone else here on Queerty, I’m sorry I sounded like a such a moronic shill for Obama.

      Jan 30, 2012 at 1:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      No 53 is a forgery. Interestingly, a number of my comments got deleted after being there for a while. My guess: “FYI” or whoever posted the forgery filed a bogus complaint to get QUEERTY to remove the comment, which is comical for QUEERTY to do given QUEERTY’s low standards, as evidenced by FYI’s continual infantile personal attacks.

      Jan 30, 2012 at 5:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Don’t mind me everybody, I’m just off my meds again. I get delusional at time. Forgive me for my childish paranoia.

      Jan 30, 2012 at 5:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Re No 55 “Don’t mind …” This is another forgery. Given “FYI”‘s conduct as shown above, I think we can make a pretty good guess as to who is doing it. How infantile. You’d think people would have outgrown that sort of behavior by the time they left middle school.

      Jan 30, 2012 at 8:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Re No 56 “Don’t mind …” That directly above is just another forgery from “B”. Given “B”’s conduct as shown above, I think we can make a pretty good guess as to who is doing it. How infantile. You’d think people would have outgrown that sort of behavior by the time they left middle school. Sorry that I was so arrogant before as to think that I owned the alphabet and the letter “B”. I guess life isn’t like The Wheel of Fortune on TV afterall. When I have another one of these psychotic breakdowns, please just ignore anything “B” says.

      …Must take my meds now.

      Jan 30, 2012 at 11:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Re No 57 “Re No 65 …”: Looks like the forger is once more behaving like a child, trying to whitewash his conduct by throwing up a smokescreen, altering text he is half-quoting (without proper use of quotation marks), and otherwise showing his immaturity.

      He must know that he has no point and is reduced to trying to throw up a smokescreen.

      Jan 31, 2012 at 12:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Please ignore me, I’m just a little crazy. As the long time poster “B” on Queerty, I have been a life-long Republican and I just like to stir it up in the Gay Community from time to time when I am bored.

      Now, you know the truth. I may have a moment later, after my meds wear off, when I contradict myself again and accuse others of forging my handle. You know, I applied for a copy write to use the handle “B” exclusively and President Obama gave me sole permission to use it. So, everybody be forewarned, I am “B” alone. Don’t use it…or I’ll sue for copy write infringement if you use my handle.

      ….Sorry, got to run now. My six foot tall pet rabbit, Harvey, wants to have sex with me and the cats again. I just wish he’d leave his carrot out of our love-making though. It’s good for the eyes, Harvey keeps telling me, but that’s not where he puts it. Ouch! It’s almost as painful as the last time ol’ Harv and I done a three-way with a Honey Badger. But, that’s another story.


      Hugs and Kisses…

      Jan 31, 2012 at 1:33 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Re No 59 (“please ignore …”) … it looks like the forger is still playing infantile games, no doubt because he/she lacks enough self respect or maturity to behave like an adult.

      Jan 31, 2012 at 6:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Re No 60 (“please ignore …”) … it looks like the forger (by the handle “B”)is still playing infantile games, no doubt because he/she (it) lacks enough self respect or maturity to behave like an adult.

      Oh, by the way…. Waaaaaaaa!!!!! Waaaaaaaaa!!!! “B” need her adult diaper changed.

      Hmmmmm…I wonder why “B” keep responded to this “forger” unless “B”‘s really lonely and needs constant attention so desperately — even from a meanie.

      PS — Waaaaaaa!!!!!

      …and …Waaaa!

      Jan 31, 2012 at 11:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Re No 61: (“Re No 60”) More infantile behavior from the forger.

      Feb 1, 2012 at 2:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Re No 61: More infantile behavior from the forgee.

      Feb 1, 2012 at 7:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Re No 62: As I said, forging posts is infantile behavior. But at least this time he’s admitting that he was doing that.

      Feb 1, 2012 at 4:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Re No 61 & 63: As I said, forging posts is infantile behavior. But at least this time she’s admitting that she was doing that.

      Feb 2, 2012 at 12:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Re No 64: the forger apparently is claiming to be a woman. Who would have guessed?

      Feb 2, 2012 at 1:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Re No 65: the forger apparently is claiming to be a woman. Who would have guessed?

      Feb 2, 2012 at 1:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      I fully support Mitt Romney for President “B”cause he is best for America. Obama is a phony. The Gay community should have realized that when Obama and the DEMS in Congress screwed us on DADT, DOMA, ENDA and everything else for three year and to this very day. Federal courts already struck down DADT as unconstitutional twice, so Obama does not get a pass on that one either. Pig that he is.

      Feb 2, 2012 at 6:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      Re No 67 – Another forgery. How infantile.

      Feb 3, 2012 at 12:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sheldon

      Agreed Obummer isn’t any sort of fierce advocate for LGBT rights, or for same gender marriage; but no President or Presidential candidate is.

      Feb 3, 2012 at 12:19 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • David

      Queer Supremacist-Ahhhh you’re just another Obamabot who drank the Flavorade! ;) Obama is not for GLBT rights or marriage equality even if Obamabots like yourself want to pretend he is. Then again with Goodwin’s law of course you’re going to see anyone who is GLBT who doesn’t like Obama as a LOL “Kapo” or Nazi. I supported Obama the first time I am not going to vote for him again and most GLBT people feel this way about him.

      Feb 3, 2012 at 12:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B

      No. 49 · Hyhybt wrote, “@B: When did either GLBT or LGBT become unacceptable?”

      Note – I replied to this earlier, but someone got QUEERTY to delete it. The summary is that the use of GLBT is unusual enough to suggest that the poster I was replying to was probably a non-gay Republican trying to get people to vote against their self interests.

      Nothing in those comments were offensive.

      Feb 3, 2012 at 2:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • No-Obot

      @ No. 69 • Sheldon — Yes, but those who have pretended to be our “fierce advocate” (i.e. Obama) and who have just done so in order to steal our votes and our money deserve a special place in hell, and they certainly do not deserve to be re-elected.

      The courts (both Democratic appointed ones and Republican appointed ones) will ultimately decide our fate. Democratic appointed jurists have decided against us (Supreme Court Justice White — a John Kennedy appointed Democrat) for instance wrote the deciding opinion upholding the vile Sodomy laws nationwide in 1986, like those in the state of George that could have put us in prison for life. In 2003, a Republican appointed Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion seventeen years later which rebuked Democrat SS Justice White’s previous slippery-slope “legal” opinion and struck down those obnoxious “consensual” Sodomy laws nationwide forever.

      So all you Obots can go suck on it when you use that lame-ass excuse that some Democrat appointee to the federal courts will always be on our side and our only salvation when recent past cases seem to indicate just the opposite. Some Democrats in the court system often go out of their way to “prove” that they are not “too liberal” and frequently express their judicial “objectivity” at our expense by throwing the GLBT community under the bus (because, you know we are expendable — and continue to make ourselves that way by not kicking in the balls those people in the Democratic Party who betray us).

      I have no doubt that if …ahem…our POTUS “constitutional law professor” Obama was on the Supreme Court today he probably would rule against us — just like how he instructed his Justice Department in how to defend DOMA and DADT for nearly three years. I don’t know what his problem is, but if white GLBT civil rights workers in the South and pro-Civil Rights president Lyndon Johnson had anything like Obama bigoted attitude, then quite likely Obama wouldn’t president today.


      Fool me once — shame on you.
      Fool me twice — shame on me.

      Don’t be a fool and reward treachery. Teach the Dems a lesson, the same lesson that any self-respecting minority (other that us here lately) would send to the Dems after being betrayed. And that is: You want my vote, then you better well fucking earn it or there will be hell to pay when you come up for re-election.

      …Just say NoBama after November 2012. We got SS marriage started under a Republican President and the Sodomy Laws struck down as well — without the help of Democrats in Congress. If you must vote Democrat — vote local and state (that is only if they prove useful to our cause). If you really think about it, Obama is useless to our struggle and he has proven time after time to be on our enemy’s side as well as on the wrong side of history. In the last three years Obama certainly did every thing he could to consistently prove it too.

      Maybe Ol’ (“Gawd’s in the Mix” only at Straight Marriages) Obama can get Rev. Rick (kill the gays in Uganda) Warren another go at delivering his unholy prayer invocation at Obama’s next (hopefully never to be) inauguration. How soon you forget the countless kicks in your collective guts ol’ GLBT community. How soon you forget like good little sheeple and lemmings. …Where’s the Gay “Pride” in that?

      Feb 3, 2012 at 4:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • lucifer

      The President has the right to do what he wants when he wants, it pisses me off when you guys attack him in the ways you do. Obama has done more for us than any other president so fuck the hell OFF!

      Mar 6, 2012 at 1:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

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

  • Copyright 2016 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.