RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

GLBT People Finally Getting A Clue

Well, Obama is pandering to the GLBT community again. He gave a speech to the Human RIghts Campaign Friday, October 9th. Personally, I think he was trying to ward off the big-ass march planned against him in DC byt the GLBT community. It didn’t work, I might add. Seems some folks are beginning to (FINALLY) catch on to his “Words, just words” crapola. Beats me what the hell took them so long, but whatever.

It isn’t just the Gay Folks who are getting a bit testy, as the video below indicates, but those of us Gay people who DID buy that Obama was going to do something for us (I don’t know what came over them) sure had something to say in the March on Oct. 10th (H/T to Logistics Monster for the video):



I came across this article by B. Daniel Blatt recently that addresses the frustrations of the GLBT community with Barack Obama, Gay Community Increasingly at Odds with Democrats. Considering the constant pandering, all talk, and no action, it is easy to see why we would be inreasingly discontented with Obama (those who were content with him in the first place, that is).

Mr. Blatt comes from a different political position than I do, and I appreciate his take here:

Perhaps the easiest thing about being a gay conservative is that we expect less from our elected leaders than do our left-of-center counterparts. Republican politicians don’t promise us the moon and stars in their campaigns, so we’re not disappointed when they don’t bestow such lofty gifts on our community once elected.

Huh. I hadn’t thought of it that way before. Interesting. He continues:

For gay Democrats, however, it’s a different story. They are repeatedly disappointed when their politicians do not follow through on the campaign pledges they make to our community.

In 1992, then-Democratic presidential candidate Bill Clinton promised to repeal the ban on gays in the military, but just a year later, he backpedaled on that promise. After he clumsily tried to act on that promise in the first few days of his administration, that Democrat realized he might suffer politically should he sign an executive order repealing the ban. At the time, the president’s signature was all that was required to allow gay men and lesbians to serve openly in the military.

Facing a firestorm of opposition from the military and Congress, Clinton relented and signed a supposed compromise policy, the legislation which became known as Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell (DADT). Gays could now serve, provided they didn’t self-identify as gay. Now the ban on open service is codified, requiring an act of Congress to be repealed.

This would not be the last time Clinton would sign legislation upsetting gay people who so enthusiastically backed him in 1992.

In the dead of night on September 20, 1996, after receiving the endorsement of the left-leaning gay rights organization Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the Democrat signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), allowing one state to bar recognition of same-sex marriages performed in a different state while defining marriage, for the purposes of federal law, as the union of one man and one woman. Although its then-leaders denounced the action, HRC did not rescind its endorsement of the then-Democratic incumbent.

Now, you know, I love me my Bill Clinton. Not as much as his wife, mind you, but still…It’s a different day now than it was even then:

Perhaps with that bit of history in mind, the current Democratic President Barack Obama thought that by currying favor with this bastion of the gay Washington, D.C., establishment, he could silence the growing chorus of criticism from erstwhile gay supporters upset by his failure to act on his campaign promises to repeal those two bills. This past Saturday, the president addressed HRC’s annual dinner in Washington where he reiterated his campaign pledges:

We are moving ahead on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. … We should not be punishing patriotic Americans who have stepped forward to serve this country. We should be celebrating their willingness to show such courage and selflessness on behalf of their fellow citizens, especially when we’re fighting two wars. … And I’ve called on Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act.

As a reminder, I severed my long-standing membership with the HRC after it endorsed Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton, one a proven advocate for the GLBT community, and one who is not. Wanna guess which one is which? Yep - Hillary is, Obamais not. That doesn’t seem to have sunk in with the folks at the HRC dinner, but other people are getting it:

That may have earned him a standing ovation inside the auditorium, but it did not quiet the criticism outside. Indeed, if anything, the speech only served to increase its volume. Left-of-center lesbian blogger Pam Spaulding took umbrage at the president’s failure to offer a timeline for repeal:

The low expectations I had regarding LGBT policy were unfortunately met on that account. If you’re an activist or citizen looking for timelines, actions, use of the bully pulpit, ANYTHING that would indicate to the community that our president was serious about moving on the laundry list of LGBT issues any time soon, you would call it a fail.

Others found different reasons to call the speech “a fail.” Left-wing gay bloggers Andrew Sullivan and Dan Savage said it sounded more like a campaign speech than a presidential address, with the latter offering, “Sorry, folks, nothing new to see here. Pledges, promises, excuses. Lip service.” They were not alone. The New York Times reported that one reader of the Bilerico Project quipped in a comment to that gay blog, “I could have watched one of his old campaign speeches and heard the same thing.”

And you know how much I just LOVE Andrew Sullivan (that was major snark - he has attacked yours truly a number of times, tongue in cheek nominating me for the Michael Moore Award. I suppose I could do worse.). He was a major Obama sycophant, singing his praises left and right, downright bubbly in his support of The One. THat is al to say, I have little sympathy that he is now so disenchanted with Obama. Maybe he could have done a little more research - check that - maybe he could have done SOME research into Obama before throwing his weight behind him. Just a thought.

And he is not the only Obama supporter and GLBT community member who is now frustrated with Obama:

John Aravosis of Americablog was less restrained in his reaction to the speech:

What did President Obama say new tonight? Absolutely nothing. … It is criminal that any gay rights organization would invite an embattled president to their dinner, giving him political cover for repeated broken promises and slaps in the face to our community (like the DOMA incest brief), and then get absolutely nothing in return. HRC’s actions only feed the suspicions of critics who say that the organization is more interested in fundraisers than in advancing our rights.

All in all, the evening was a disappointment, but not unexpected. President Obama doesn’t do controversy, and we, my friends, are controversy. So, the bad blood between this administration and the gay community will remain, and continue to worsen.

By this measure, the incumbent Democrat is a lot like the last Democrat to sit in the White House: both seek to avoid controversy, particularly on gay issues. And yet, in seeking to avoid controversy in the general population, Obama has further stirred the pot in the gay community. Even some of his most zealous defenders on the gay left have refused to cut him any slack for his failure to move forward on repealing DADT and DOMA.

Well, and they shouldn’t cut him any slack. Then again, IMHO, they should have pushed harder for a real advocate - Hillary - than the guy they thought was “cool,” or whatever the hell they were thinking - if indeed they were. Blatt continues:

And these outraged voices on the gay left have a greater opportunity today to make public their views than did their counterparts in the Clinton era. Many of them blog, some for heavily trafficked sites. These bloggers have prevented the voices of the establishment gay organizations from dominating the discourse (as they had in years past). When HRC’s president Joe Solmonese made excuses for the president’ s inaction, these bloggers were quick to take him to task.

Due in large part to the integrity of these gay left bloggers, a “schism,” as Spaulding puts it, has opened up between “Gay Inc. [and] the grassroots”. The blogosphere, in short, has changed everything. Gay Inc. (to use Spaulding’s epithet for the establishment gay organizations) no longer reigns supreme as the public voice of the gay community.

It has been supplemented by voices less submissive to the dictates of the Democratic Party. Blogs have given disgruntled Democrats a larger megaphone with which to express their disappointment with a party whose leaders have long assumed that gay voters would remain in their camp even if they didn’t act on their campaign promises.

And Americans have become increasingly aware that the gay community does not speak with one voice. Nor does it march it lockstep to the tune of the Democratic Party.

Sure, Obama made a small move recently and nominated Clifford Stanley, a 33 year Marine two star general (retired), to this position:

President Barack Obama intends to nominate Dr. Clifford L. Stanley as the undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness — the position within the Defense Department that oversees the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

“He is likely to be the president’s key Pentagon player in the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ debate and will be critical for the president in getting military uniform buy-in,” said Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the repeal lobby group Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.

Well, that’s just peachy keen. I don’t know how long it will take to get him confirmed, but it’s just another step. Honestly - HOW much longer are we going to have to debate this horrible legislation?? Did Obama not promise to abolish DADT shortly after he took office? He has a Super Majority, for pete’s sake, and at the very least, he could employ a stay on DADT, but no (as of Oct.17, 459 service members fired under DADT).

But this is a bigger picture issue than DADT, or even DOMA, for that matter. It’s how an entire segment of the population is treated disparately that is the issue.

Along those lines, I think a number of people have started to realize that Democrats do a lot of talking, very little listening, and even less fulfilling of campaign promises made, GLBT people included. Perhaps we can learn that one has to look at more than the letter beside the name, and really look at the candidate. For instance, John McCain stood up for a friend who came out, extending his support to him. Obama, on the other hand, campaigned with, and consistently surrounded himself with, homophobes (McClurkin, Meeks, and Kmiec, to name just three). That is to say, maybe, and I include myself in this, we need to look beyond the letters beside the names, and really look at the people, their character, their words, and how they match up with their actions. Maybe then, these people who gave of their money, and their VOTE, wouldn’t be so disappointed, and frustrated, now. Just a thought.

Trackback URL

RSS Feed for This Post30 Comments »

Comment by b mathews | 2009-10-18 13:11:28

this may be a bit ot but interesting. on chris mathews show sat, i detected some disappointment in his messiah. is he beginning to come out of his koolaid induced coma?? i stopped watching him when he and olbermann started trashing hillary during the primaries. i tune in now just once in a while to see if he still gets that tingle up his leg everytime obama opens his mouth. his attitude now seems to be more like “dont pee on my leg and tell me its raining”

Comment by mary | 2009-10-19 16:43:36

I stopped watching MSNBC alatogether. Especially after moron “Obama gives me leg-thrilling events” Obama sycophant Matthews and “take her behind the shed” Olbermann started trashing HIllary!

No to Hillary (or Palin) haters will ever have me listen to their stupidities and sexism!Enough!

Sullivan, Aravosis Mourgos, enjoy the trashing you morons are getting from Lover Boy Empty Suit Obambi!
You deserve the crap….

 
 

Comment by LibOne | 2009-10-18 13:48:43

When did Andrew Sullivan become a liberal blogger? During the Bush years he was a conservative.

 

Comment by BuzzisbackLatte | 2009-10-18 13:54:17

Why is Andrew Sullivan still in this country?

Comment by Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy | 2009-10-18 15:27:27

Excellent question. No doubt, you heard abt his drug bust that was “handled” for him. It should have gotten him deported…

And he became a liberal blogger when he fell for Obama’s Rainbow Unicorn BS.

 

Comment by whoframedrudy | 2009-10-18 20:51:19

Why does Andrew Sullivan even exist?

 
 

Comment by jwrjr | 2009-10-18 13:55:04

In the matter of broken promises, the GLBT community need not take it personally. Ozero breaks promises made to anybody and everybody. (sigh)

Comment by Docelder | 2009-10-18 14:20:21

It is called being a “player”. Then again bots loved his “game” during the election season. So ultimately, it is also now called “Karma”. Bots everywhere can now own it. Miserable failure would be an improvement.

 
 

Comment by foxyladi14 | 2009-10-18 14:31:48

i,m so dissapointed in this potus.he has failed at everything.

Comment by leslie | 2009-10-18 21:18:54

I don’t see him failing. I think he has/had no intention of doing anything to lose his AA base. Doing anything for the GLBT community will cost him that base and he will then have failed at keeping his “legacy” alive. The man is truly “just words”.

Comment by leslie | 2009-10-18 21:22:28

And please don’t misunderstand my comment to mean I support Ozer0. Anyone who has read my comments, since waaay before the election, knows just how much I loathe this man.

 

Comment by lorac | 2009-10-18 21:37:33

But the gay population is about the same size as the black population. I suppose he figures that blacks may always vote for race, as they did for him, so he worries more about keeping them. Some still will, but a lot are waking up.

 

Comment by stodgie | 2009-10-19 04:11:20

obummer could walk naked down pennsylvania ave and he wouldn’t lose his aa base.

 

Comment by b mathews | 2009-10-19 17:38:08

i dont get why AA’s are opposed to GLBT when there are as many gay AA”s as every other ethnicity. (according to rumor, obama is among them).

 
 

Comment by b mathews | 2009-10-19 17:55:13

i have been around since FDR and lived thru many administrations but have NEVER seen the populace so unhappy with a president so early in his term. if his poll numbers continue dropping, (which they surely will) he wont want to run again in 2012 (please God) if he thinks hes going to lose. his inflated ego couldnt take it. also he wont have acorn around to get phony votes or intimidate people. even tho i am a registered dem who voted for mccain and will vote for all repubs. in 2010 to make sure O will lose much of his power base. harry reid is my senator and he needs to be the first to go.

 
 

Comment by Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy | 2009-10-18 15:33:05

It amazes me that organizations like HRC still buy his lies, and fall in adoration at his feet (or give him standing ovations - whatever).

And yes, sadly, all groups will find this out at one point or another, it seems.

Someone tell me again why all of these people fell for this guy in the first place, because I sure don’t get it…

Comment by Ferd Berfle | 2009-10-18 19:10:33

Someone tell me again why all of these people fell for this guy in the first place, because I sure don’t get it.

The obots were mesmerized by That One’s packaging, never once peaking inside to see just how rotten the core he is. Now they are just in denial because they are afraid to look and have their hopey-changey dreams dashed against the shores of reality.

This is part and parcel of the style-over-substance and format-over-content malady that afflicts 69,000,000 Americans. You can just about sell them anything so long as it looks good. Real discernment is not their forte, I’m afraid.

 
 

Comment by OSellingBullShit | 2009-10-18 18:13:37

Larry has a great piece on this topic about how the gay community was getting unwelcome blow job from Obama….

Comment by Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy | 2009-10-18 23:14:42

Yes, it was a great piece. Larry’s the man! :-)

And thanks, Ferd - I appreciate the reminder!

 
 

Comment by Jenny | 2009-10-18 20:24:17

I think all of you are missing the point. Obama desperately needs to score some points with his supporters, the easy way to do it is to repeal DADT. As much as it’s hard for me to believe anything that comes out of Obama’s mouth, I think that this time he is telling the truth. DADT will soon be history. I mean if not, then the guy is the biggest a-hole to ever grace American politics and making that speech again when he knowingly has no intention of following his promise is kind of sinister.

Comment by Lana | 2009-10-18 20:52:09

I don’t believe DADT will be history any time soon. I believe Obama thinks he bought himself 6-8 months with his placating speech. But he also knows the LGBT community has no where else to go. Are they going to become Republicans? Obama knows this and is playing them just like he plays everyone else.

Comment by leslie | 2009-10-18 21:28:23

I agree completely.

 
 

Comment by lorac | 2009-10-18 21:33:14

I’m of the opposite opinion. He has staked everything on passing health reform, he and many commentators feel his entire presidency will be affected if he doesn’t “win” it. If he makes any other moves, he will lose some supporters for health care, so I think he’s doing his usual “present” behavior (treading water and getting nothing done). I don’t think he will risk any support.

And the poster above is correct - the further left someone is, the less they have “somewhere to go”. So he’s going to cater to people who are wavering, not to his base. Which is a somewhat predictable political move, but IMO, Obama is particularly without principles or strong beliefs, and I don’t believe he is really invested in doing anything for gays. He just plays someone who cares on TV.

 
 

Comment by Lana | 2009-10-18 21:29:58

Did anyone see the skit on SNL last night. Skewered Obama’s DADT:
http://tv.popcrunch.com/snl-300-gay-spartans-sketch-gerard-butler-video/

Comment by Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy | 2009-10-18 23:28:28

Holy smokes! What is going on over at SNL?? They really seem to have come off the KoolAide IV!!

Thanks, Lana - I’m going to have to add this! :-)

Comment by Lana | 2009-10-19 11:42:44

That’s the good thing about having a teenage daughter. She keeps me up to date on the shows I’m too old to stay up for. And she never drank the kool-aid!

 
 
 

Comment by ANonOMouse | 2009-10-18 22:39:36

Amy:

Trying shooting off an Email to the Human Rights Campaign and telling them how much you DO NOT appreciate their folding chair Leader, Joe Salmonese. Especially Joe’s post dinner talk with reporters where he suggested that the REGULAR gay just doesn’t understand the political nuance of Washington. What a piece of work this guy is. Like you I withdrew my membership from HRC during last years Obama love fest, but I couldn’t resist telling them that, not only will I never return, I will work my ass off to inform every gay person I know to write “RETURN TO SENDER” on all future HRC solicitations. Joe Salmonese has totally in bed with BHO and his shower mate Rahm Emanuel (what a visual)

It’s time to KICK these CONNECTED and totally at the trough phony gay rights “LEADERS” to the f’ing curb in favor of we, the COMMONERS. Let’s take this movement back!!!

Comment by Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy | 2009-10-18 23:24:41

Oh, believe you me, I surely have. They sent me a survey, too, asking why I had left, and you know I told them exactly why. Plus, I spoke to them on the phone when they called to ask for more money (uh, yeah, NO).

They replaced a very good leader of HRC, Cheryl Jacques, with Salmonese, because she was pushing same sex marriage. I know - it seems kinda strange that THAT would be the reason at this point, but that was the excuse they used. He was a milquetoast from the get-go, IMHO. I knew for a fact he was in bed with Obama when I got a call to do a survey on the political candidates when Hillary was still in the field, and the vast majority of their questions pitted Obama against McCain. I kept asking why they weren’t including Hillary, since she had done so much for our community, and the guy was like, “um, uh, I don’t know, these are the questions…” I made it very clear I didn’t appreciate that they left Hillary out and why they should be endorsing HER.

They are so out of step with their membership, it’s sad. Or would be if it wasn’t so infuriating.

 
 

Comment by stodgie | 2009-10-19 04:13:53

karma is having the truck worked on for her trip around the country in 2010. the chickens are all excited about their coming vacation. they are looking forward to roosting in the white house.

 

Comment by ANonOMouse | 2009-10-19 09:28:07

Amy:

I emailed HRC - Joe Salmonese and told him to remember who the hell he works for and to stop treating us with such condescension in suggesting that because we’re not rubbing elbows with the President that we ordinary gay commoners don’t understand the political nuance of gays rights and politics. I recieved an apologetic letter from the HRC stating that Joe didn’t intend that comment in a demeaning way and went on to remind me about all the good work HRC does. Yeah good work and the good work is the problem because they’ve forgotten the difference between good work and HARD WORK!!! To the elite of our world good work is dressing up in Tux and rubbing elbows at a formal dinner where the President delivers a short speech that blows smoke up their butts. They need a reality check!!!

 

RSS Feed for This PostPost a Comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)