Friday, March 13, 2009
Politics / Homo What's At Stake
Posted by Dan Savage on Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 1:37 PM
Before Obama keeps his campaign promises to gays and lesbians—campaign promises he made explicitly and prominently—he needs to think about the people who matter most.
Now, Mr. Obama is in a tough spot. If he supports the personnel office on denying benefits to the San Francisco court employees, he risks agitating liberal groups that helped him win election. If he supports the judges and challenges the marriage act, he risks alienating Republicans with whom he is seeking to work on economic, health care and numerous other matters.
And, gee, if the Republicans in Congress have demonstrated anything over the last few months, why, it's their willingness to work with Obama—particularly on the economy. What a shame it would be if Obama suddenly moved on gay rights, alienated the GOP, and brought a screeching halt to the bipartisan bonhomie that has characterized his first 50-odd days in office.
Jesus.
Share via
4
I love you, Dan. You always know how to cut through the BS & tell it like it is. Keep up the good work. You & Jon Stewart are my heros. (seriously!)
5
Well said, Dan. If Obama took a firm, non-nonsense position and made it clear that equal protection and due process are non-negotiable, he would actually win the admiration from a number of anti-equality folks. People respect politicians for taking principled stands, even when they disagree on the details.
6
Obama has a shitload of actual problems on his plate.
This ain't even on the hors d'oeurve tray.
If Obama has any judgement he'll quietly sweep this away for another day.
(Try not to squeal like a bitch, Dan.)
This ain't even on the hors d'oeurve tray.
If Obama has any judgement he'll quietly sweep this away for another day.
(Try not to squeal like a bitch, Dan.)
7
Obama is a slave of Zionism, you have to be some kind of naive retard not to see it.
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/is…
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/is…
9
This is great, but I don't remember any promises, even if apparently you guys got a letter.
Other than ending the gays in the military ban.
Other than ending the gays in the military ban.
12
Dan,
I read that piece in the NYT this morning. I didn't realize the bind he is in. Sure, it's problematic but that is the nature of the beast-politics (I noticed the story was listed under "Politics" in the NYT). Very few observers both in & out of the Beltway expected the GOP to fully cooperate with the stimulus packages of Pres. Obama. Hence, the earmarks.
Yes, I believe it is reasonable to cover with health insurance partners of federal employees in same-sex relationships. I just didn't know how complicated it was to render given the DOMA of 96'(?).
All I'm saying is that these are the kind of situations Presidents expect during their tenure. We'll see how it pans out.
I read that piece in the NYT this morning. I didn't realize the bind he is in. Sure, it's problematic but that is the nature of the beast-politics (I noticed the story was listed under "Politics" in the NYT). Very few observers both in & out of the Beltway expected the GOP to fully cooperate with the stimulus packages of Pres. Obama. Hence, the earmarks.
Yes, I believe it is reasonable to cover with health insurance partners of federal employees in same-sex relationships. I just didn't know how complicated it was to render given the DOMA of 96'(?).
All I'm saying is that these are the kind of situations Presidents expect during their tenure. We'll see how it pans out.
13
But he won't -- extend benefits to same-sex parteners of federal workers, that is. (And I'd be happy to lay P=0.75 odds on that.)
Not because the Republican Party is against it. but because a clear majority of voters are against it -- significantly larger than the majority that elected him. And because gay rights aren't anywhere near the top of his agenda (or, in a related point, anywhere near the top of the agendas of the vast majority of voters). And because the resulting brouhaha would be a distraction from what he really cares about.
He will probably asssign some advisor to figure out some minor symbolic gesture he could make that might look good to those who care and go unnoticed by everyone else. So look forward to that.
Not because the Republican Party is against it. but because a clear majority of voters are against it -- significantly larger than the majority that elected him. And because gay rights aren't anywhere near the top of his agenda (or, in a related point, anywhere near the top of the agendas of the vast majority of voters). And because the resulting brouhaha would be a distraction from what he really cares about.
He will probably asssign some advisor to figure out some minor symbolic gesture he could make that might look good to those who care and go unnoticed by everyone else. So look forward to that.
14
...or maybe he wants to draw attention away from the economy and is looking for something explosive to do so
15
Christ, Dan's getting upset with Obama, the republicans all hate Obama, he can't seem to please anyone nowadays.
16
"but because a clear majority of voters are against it -- significantly larger than the majority that elected him"
You got some polling data to support that?
You got some polling data to support that?
17
@16,
A clear majority of Americans (about 54 percent) support civil unions for gays and lesbians. I don't see that 54 percent, even those who don't want to extend full marriage, getting that worked up over gay couples getting federal partner benefits.
A clear majority of Americans (about 54 percent) support civil unions for gays and lesbians. I don't see that 54 percent, even those who don't want to extend full marriage, getting that worked up over gay couples getting federal partner benefits.
18
I don't think there would be all that much brouhaha. Sure there would be some initial rending of garments by the benighted, but sooner than most people think, it would blow over, precisely for the reason everyone thinks he shouldn't risk it: there are bigger fish to fry. Pass some quality common sense gay rights legislation, move the issue into the 21st century, and get on with other jobs.
Republicans aren't going to have time to bitch too much because the minute Obama hits them with his health care hammer, the Republicans won't be able to think about anything else. The liberals, on the other hand, will be pleased as punch and will work harder than ever for him.
Legislative homophobia is on the verge of being as dead as Jim Crow laws and there's a perfect opportunity to make that happen right now.
Republicans aren't going to have time to bitch too much because the minute Obama hits them with his health care hammer, the Republicans won't be able to think about anything else. The liberals, on the other hand, will be pleased as punch and will work harder than ever for him.
Legislative homophobia is on the verge of being as dead as Jim Crow laws and there's a perfect opportunity to make that happen right now.
19
Oh come on!! By supporting gays Obama would be supporting the Republicans! They could finally come out of their closets... oh i guess they won't without kicking and screaming. nev'mind.
21
In his place, I'd only extend benefits for contracted individuals, and phase in employees in his second term.
After we return the tax rate for the rich to what it was under Reagan.
After we return the tax rate for the rich to what it was under Reagan.
22
That's right, Dan. Pursue that agenda to the exclusion of everything else.
You know, once you get marriage rights and adoption rights, thus satisfying your only motive for allying yourself with the progressive left, you're going to make an awesome neoconservative. Your response to 9/11, your response to class questions and 1st Amendment issues -- you're basically just a fucking soccer mom who happens to have a dick and who is therefore disenfranchised. You get what you want, you'll never vote Democrat again and, frankly, good riddance.
You know, once you get marriage rights and adoption rights, thus satisfying your only motive for allying yourself with the progressive left, you're going to make an awesome neoconservative. Your response to 9/11, your response to class questions and 1st Amendment issues -- you're basically just a fucking soccer mom who happens to have a dick and who is therefore disenfranchised. You get what you want, you'll never vote Democrat again and, frankly, good riddance.
25
I think the real problem for Obama is that gay rights issues, while gaining in acceptance, are still fairly unpopular around the country. I think he's afraid that if he makes major moves on gay rights, the Republicans will make that the main issue of national debate, thereby scuttling the rest of his agenda on a (potentially) losing issue. Alas, the Republicans are quite good at this. For this reason, it'll probably have to wait to the end of his second term. Sorry, gays!
27
Wow they really hate gays, don't they. Dear god, anything but extending spousal benefits!!! The government could probably save even more money by denying all spousal benefits to opposite sex couples too, that might help the budget.
28
What promises, Dan? I think you're thinking of the secret, reading-between-the-lines promises that Obama supporters told each other when he was fighting Clinton for the nomination. The only promise I heard was the promise not to go back in time and vote to support DADT.
29
@16:
http://pewforum.org/docs/index.php?DocID…
Unfortunately.
You got some polling data to support that?
http://pewforum.org/docs/index.php?DocID…
Unfortunately.
30
Whoops, that was gay marriage, not civil unions (which I assume includes benefits) that most Americans support. My bad.
And yes, I'm an asshole for posting three times in a row.
And yes, I'm an asshole for posting three times in a row.
31
Big Sven: http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/civil_r…
It says he believes in the repeal of DOMA. Plain as day.
Obviously, it's easy to realize that given the number of promises and all the extensive things needed to realize those promises, it may or may not take time (rush job or it waits, not really a cut-and-dry process).
It says he believes in the repeal of DOMA. Plain as day.
Obviously, it's easy to realize that given the number of promises and all the extensive things needed to realize those promises, it may or may not take time (rush job or it waits, not really a cut-and-dry process).
32
Obama just needs to grow a god damn pair. I didn't vote for him so we could all dance around in sparkly tutus and hold hands. I voted for him so he would repeal or reverse all those dumbshit laws Republicans made, and he's doing a pretty good job so far. Now he just needs to tell the Repubs to go cry him a river. They didn't care when they were in office, and Obama has tried while Republicans have tantrums like pre-schoolers in the play room.
When republicans start appointing people who have half a brain to talk for them, then I'll start listening.
When republicans start appointing people who have half a brain to talk for them, then I'll start listening.
33
I think the most important point to make is that one of the plaintiffs in one of the lawsuits is named Amy Cunninghis. I accept your thanks in advance for elevating the discourse in this particular thread.
34
Obama promised to repeal DOMA and DADT. Period. Those weren't hints, those were promises published in black and white on his website long before he was elected.
@ Big Sven, actually, the majority of Americans--including many conservatives who have been grudgingly backed into a corner--say they support full and equal CIVIL rights for gays and lesbians. Just not marriage. So this would fall squarely under the category of rights most Americans would want to protect.
Another controversial issue wrapped up in Obama's platform was abortion. He promised to be uncompromisingly pro-choice, and you know what? He's done it. Repealed toxic Bush laws, made birth control affordable again, made doctors responsible for actually informing their patients, bam, bam, bam. And I'm proud of him for that. But if he could promise and carry through on women's rights, why couldn't he do the same for gay rights?
@ Big Sven, actually, the majority of Americans--including many conservatives who have been grudgingly backed into a corner--say they support full and equal CIVIL rights for gays and lesbians. Just not marriage. So this would fall squarely under the category of rights most Americans would want to protect.
Another controversial issue wrapped up in Obama's platform was abortion. He promised to be uncompromisingly pro-choice, and you know what? He's done it. Repealed toxic Bush laws, made birth control affordable again, made doctors responsible for actually informing their patients, bam, bam, bam. And I'm proud of him for that. But if he could promise and carry through on women's rights, why couldn't he do the same for gay rights?
35
Dan, I like your thinking. Being older, I am always a bit reticent to just accept a candidate's promises on face value. Remember, Clinton's, "I feel your pain," and then delivering DADT and DOMA? I am much more interested in what people do. And Obama's selection of Rick Warren for the Inauguration spoke volumes to me. I don't believe in the Obama love fest. He is an elected official - the highest in the land - and we must have the political maturity to exact what is in our community's interest: the repeal of DADT and the undoing of DOMA. In addition, he must support our agenda. But we need to remember that he had no problem selecting Warren, an action that he knew full well was offensive. Is this Slick Willy in black face?
36
The cries for bipartianship mostly come from the Washington press corp. Everyone else just wants some shit done.
Most Commented on Slog
-
Straight Up by Dan Savage
-
Stephen Fry v. the Catholic Church by Dan Savage
-
Neologism Needed by Dan Savage
-
Palin's Cheat Sheet by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: The Toilet Brush Off by Dan Savage
-
Every Child Deserves a Mother and a Father by Dan Savage
-
Tea Party Crowd Believes That Only Good Spellers Should Vote by Dan Savage
-
How's That Hopey, Changey Stuff Working Out For Childhood Obesity? by Dan Savage
-
This Shit Will Never Get Old by Eli Sanders
-
Every Child Deserves a Mother and a Father by Dan Savage
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (36) RSS