YOUR FLY IS OPEN!
Oh, spare me the tears for Obama and the Democratic Party. They have screwed the Gay community for the last time. I guess you know more than all us upset queers about how we should just be patient and we will get our rights one day...
Piss off
OK, now that I'm a little calmer, perhaps you should go read the unanimous anger from David Mixner, Andrew Sullivan, Evan Wolfsen.. or maybe you know more about the Constitution and civil rights than all of them???
The Democrats, and Obama campaigned to END Don't, Ask, Don't Tell. Even with 60-70% support to end it, including a majority of CONSERVATIVES, the Democrats in Congress (Reid, Pelosi) say they will not touch it in Obama's FIRST TERM..
The same for the UNCONSTITUTIONAL "Defense of Marraige Act" which Obama pledged to repeal, or revise to allow marriage rights for gay couples, is now off the table for Obama's FIRST TERM! And his DOJ just wrote a brief DEFENDING it, using the same anti-gay arguments as the Bush administration, and you think gays are overreacting!!!!
The Democrats/Obama will not even attempt to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act!
Nothing! Nothing from Obama or the Democratic Party for at least his First Term!!
Here is why Gays are Angry at Obama:http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/06/15/
politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5090503.shtml
Please don't repeat the lie that Obama is a "ferocious" defender of gay rights... How is his support of gay rights "unprecendented"?? Please enlighten me.. Even Dick Cheney is more supportive of gay rights than Obama.. at least he supports gay marriage with Obama continues to OPPOSE.
Auto, hahahahahaha!!!
Cunts will be cunts. You can never do enough for them. You should know this by now.
Here's some reading for you:
Read the Human Rights Campaign's response to the Obama DOJ Brief:
http://www.hrcbackstory.org/2009...-joe-solmonese/
New York Times:
A Bad Call
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/1...6tue1.html?
_r=1
David Mixner, DOMA Brief Brings Shame to Obama Team
http://www.davidmixner.com/2009/...-
team.html#more
I rest my case
And in case you missed it.. Watch Rachel Maddow and Howard Dean on the Obama Anti-Gay DOJ brief
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H...h?
v=HNnHlixg4Wk
Yes, I agree that Aravosis is prone to hysteria but things don't move as slowly as they did once-upon-a-time. I live on a real world of short attention spans & zero-to-sixty in nanoseconds. I expect it now. Your mileage, evidently, varies.
The DOJ should never have filed that brief & IF they had to, they should not have had it authored by a Bush administration embed & written in demeaning language.
I don't think you understand how precedent works. Plessy v Ferguson and Dred Scott cannot be used to justify discrimination in 2009 because they have been overturned. They are cited as places where the government was demonstrably in error. If a government lawyer filed a brief people saying that Dred Scott was rightly decided and should be binding precedent, people would be up in arms.
Richard Socarides (former aide to Bill Clinton) refutes the argument that the Obama admistration HAD to defend DOMA since it is current law: The Choice to Defend DOMA and its Consequences
Autocrat seems to be as clueless as the Obama DOJ. Their brief DEFENDING DOMA (which Obama himself called reprehensible), strengthened the case fro DOMA and undermines our efforts to repeal it!
You wrote, "if you happen to be one of those GLBTs for whom Barack Obama's unprecedented support of your basic rights still isn't good enough or fast enough"
WHAT Support? So far all we've heard are campaign promises; but we have not yet seen any action! So far there is no proof what so ever that his "support" is real.
When he gets ENDA passed, and repeals DOMA and ends DA-DT; THEN I'll believe he supports us; and NOT before! Actions speak louder then words.
Auto, I'm going to have to agree with Jim and the others here. I haven't read Aravosis argument, but I will say that part of the reason civil rights took a hundred years was because well-meaning liberals kept telling blacks they should wait and be patient. They were telling King to wait and be patient, too. Should gays have to wait a hundred years? Starting when, exactly? We are supposed to be more enlightened today and it shouldn't have to take so long.
And really, it's silly to argue that the president is bound to uphold the laws Congress passes. That's true enough, but he is also in a position, and has a moral and historical obligation, to lead the way in changing those laws if they are unfair or unjust. We're not talking about Constutitional amendments here. We're talking about acts of Congress, which get changed and reversed with Exlax-like regularity. The president was under zero obligation to file any brief at all either supporting or rejecting DOMA. This was a deliberate act that is difficult to ignore.
However, I will say that I suspect a bit of Obama political jujitsu in this, too fucking clever by half. By doing this, even as the tide is turning in favor of gay marriage (especially as the tide is turning!), he can always say it was the will of the people, not the president, who changed the law on this issue. That way nobody can ever accuse him of being a friend to teh gay. His people are probably telling him he doesn't have to worry about the gay vote, because come 2012, who they gonna vote for - Haley Barbour?
maybe they will vote for Haley, I figure he's in the closet anyway...I think the gay advocates have it right; can't Obama reverse DADT by executive order? That's a no-brainer. he should do it very quickly. Obviously DOMA is Congress, but he doesn't have to support it by filing briefs, either, unless there is some behind the scenes reason to do so of which I am unaware.
Auto--- Jeff speaks for me entirely although I do agree with you that John Aravosis can be self-serving and over the top. AND that too much has probably been made of the DOMA brief.
Aravosis used to be one of my favorite bloggers. sigh.
Your statements about why things take time is assumptive in the mold of William F. Buckley, not fact-based. your use of legal precident strange, and your tone surprisingly and uncharacteristically elitist.
But I too smell jujitsu. Either that or Rahm--- who should only be called on as an enforcer, never an adviser.
MLK on white moderates: "Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection." Letter from Birmingham Jail (Maybe Obama Should Read it)
And here's more on the liberal call for patience until we get our rights.. On the "myth of time": We will have to repent..not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people. WE MUST COME TO SEE THAT HUMAN PROGRESS NEVER ROLLS IN ON THE WHEELS OF INEVITABILITY. IT COMES THROUGH THE TIRELESS EFFORTS AND PERSISTENT WORK.."
No fucking shit. Now say something original that we all don't know already.
I know you want results. I want results too. But you're pissing in the tent of your best friends and shitting in their yard. And make no mistake. Liberal Democrats are your friends. Democratsmay not be your best advocates... but unquestionably the left wing is your best ally. That is perverse Jim Maynard.
Criticize your friends by all means. Show them what's right and what's wrong. But your way is the way of defeat. You're going thirdPartisan demagogue when we need fucking leaders who can bring the tribes together.
Adding---
I'm also sick of reasonable people acting like there's some separation between the gay civil rights struggle and the black civil rights struggle etc. That's like wondering whether or not Gettysburg and Bull Run--being two distinct battles--could both be part of the same war.
Civil Rights is an idea much bigger than any group. Blacks don't own it. And NOBODY HAS WON.
As a demographic blacks still seem to have it much worse than gays in many ways. You seldom find failing gay schools, or prisons piled up with gays, and gay neighborhoods still tend to be desirable places to live, but there's also a bunch of legal crap that needs to be worked out regarding the mutual joining of lives and properties.
And then there are the Mexicans. Don't get me started about the Mexicans. And fat people. And women--- Christ, women aren't there yet but since they're the only people going to college these days maybe they'll get there.
Point being--- one of the biggest lies America has ever been fed is that the Civil Rights movement ended in the 60's and the good guys won. It's ongoing and it's about everybody.
I agree that gay Democrats need to work to get the Democratic Party to live up to its promises to the gay community... I am not a Democrat, I am a Socialist. I'm tired of apologizing for the Democratic Party's backstabbing the gay community, after pumping us for votes and money. I feels good to belong to a party that does not pander to the "center-right" and corporate elite, and can say it supports FULL EQUALITY for gays and lesbians, without reservations and linguistic acrobatics. Since I am a socialist, not a capitalist, I am a member of the Socialist Party USA. It represents my views and values, not the Democratic Party--but by all means, I encourage progressive and gay Democrats to take their party back from the corporate financiers who own it. That's another issue--
(I tried organizing a Stonewall Democrat chapter in Memphis, but had little support from the gay community so I gave up.)
Considering they are unofficially announcing now that Obama is going to extend full benefits to gay partners of Federal employees, I am more convinced than ever that this is more of his political ninjitsu. He's hiding in plain sight.
Or maybe they were afraid no one would show up at next week's big DNC Gay Fundraiser...
Oh, it turns out Obama's "memorandum" will not be an executive order, and will not extend "full benefits' like healthcare, etc. to same-sex partners, just some travel expenses, etc. for fed. employees... looks like a bone to make up for the anti-gay DOJ brief fiasco..
Commenting by HaloScan
