Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, May 27, 2009
Politics / Homo Fierce Urgency Of Whenever Watch
Posted by Dan Savage on Wed, May 27, 2009 at 8:52 AM
President Obama is appearing at a fundraiser in California tonight—the day after the Prop 8 decision—where he will be greeted by a protest organized by gay and lesbian activists. Yesterday, of course, the White House refused to take a position on Prop 8 and the president has had nothing to say, save for one limp joke, about marriage equality even as the debate—and developments in Iowa, Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire, and California—roils the country.
Pop quiz: Are any other core Democrat constituency groups having to hound the president to live up to his campaign promises and rhetoric on their issues?
Didn't think so.
UPDATE: Okay, okay. My pop quiz question was stoopid. Cressona lets me have it in comments:
I don't know, how about most core Democratic constituencies? The ACLU and activists on torture and detainees. Anti-war activists. And does anyone really feel comfortable that Obama's not going to cave on a public option for health insurance, that he's going to have the stomach for an all-out war with the medical-industrial complex? I could go on.Dan, you're a grown man in a position of power. When are you going to take off the blinders and get past the paranoid persecution complex that somehow my identity group is the only group that's getting the shaft? In other words, when are you going to grow the fuck up?
Point taken, C. But at least Obama has been seen in public wrestling with those issues—he's engaged on torture, detainees, health care, etc., even if the end result hasn't always been what we'd like to see. On gay issues, by comparison, there's nothing but an icy, discomforting silence emanating from the White House. And it's not just 'mos-in-blinders who are perplexed by the president's inaction and silence on gay issues:
When Obama invoked same-sex marriage in an innocuous joke at the White House correspondents’ dinner two weeks ago—he and his political partner, David Axelrod, went to Iowa to “make it official”—it seemed all the odder that he hasn’t engaged the issue substantively.... Worse, Obama’s opposition to same-sex marriage is now giving cover to every hard-core opponent of gay rights, from the Miss USA contestant Carrie Prejean to the former Washington mayor Marion Barry, each of whom can claim with nominal justification to share the president’s views.In reality, they don’t. Obama has long been, as he says, a fierce advocate for gay equality. The Windy City Times has reported that he initially endorsed legalizing same-sex marriage when running for the Illinois State Senate in 1996. The most common rationale for his current passivity is that his plate is too full. But the president has so far shown an impressive inclination both to multitask and to argue passionately for bedrock American principles when he wants to. Relegating fundamental constitutional rights to the bottom of the pile until some to-be-determined future seems like a shell game.... The gay civil rights movement has fewer obstacles in its path than did Dr. King’s Herculean mission to overthrow the singular legacy of slavery. That makes it all the more shameful that it has fewer courageous allies in Washington than King did. If “American Idol” can sing out for change on Fox in prime time, it ill becomes Obama, of all presidents, to remain mute in the White House.
Read the rest of Frank Rich's column here.
1
"Are any other core Democrat constituency groups having to hound the president to live up to his campaign promises and rhetoric on their issues?"
Medical marijuana advocates?
Medical marijuana advocates?
3
I'm starting to think it's pretty helpful that we get to hound him, that somebody at least has to.
Populism is giving your constituencies just enough to keep them from making a ruckus. All your constituencies. In a democracy it isn't always a great idea, y'know, so maybe there's an aspect of our status as squeaky wheels that keeps everybody aware that his moves are quite calculated.
Sure, he's mollified the other core constituencies. He's failed to do so with us, and we're making as big a stink about it as possible. This tells the other constituencies that his support of them is not as reliable as they might otherwise be convinced.
It sucks that we're left out, but it's great that the fact of that might help keep Obama off that pedestal. Being allowed to deify him, or any American elected, would be much more dangerous to us all in the long run.
Populism is giving your constituencies just enough to keep them from making a ruckus. All your constituencies. In a democracy it isn't always a great idea, y'know, so maybe there's an aspect of our status as squeaky wheels that keeps everybody aware that his moves are quite calculated.
Sure, he's mollified the other core constituencies. He's failed to do so with us, and we're making as big a stink about it as possible. This tells the other constituencies that his support of them is not as reliable as they might otherwise be convinced.
It sucks that we're left out, but it's great that the fact of that might help keep Obama off that pedestal. Being allowed to deify him, or any American elected, would be much more dangerous to us all in the long run.
5
Dan, I'm totally with you on marriage equality, but I'm stupefied by the following:
I don't know, how about most core Democratic constituencies? The ACLU and activists on torture and detainees. Anti-war activists. And does anyone really feel comfortable that Obama's not going to cave on a public option for health insurance, that he's going to have the stomach for an all-out war with the medical-industrial complex? I could go on.
Dan, you're a grown man in a position of power. When are you going to take off the blinders and get past the paranoid persecution complex that somehow my identity group is the only group that's getting the shaft? In other words, when are you going to grow the fuck up?
Pop quiz: Are any other core Democrat constituency groups having to hound the president to live up to his campaign promises and rhetoric on their issues?
Didn't think so.
I don't know, how about most core Democratic constituencies? The ACLU and activists on torture and detainees. Anti-war activists. And does anyone really feel comfortable that Obama's not going to cave on a public option for health insurance, that he's going to have the stomach for an all-out war with the medical-industrial complex? I could go on.
Dan, you're a grown man in a position of power. When are you going to take off the blinders and get past the paranoid persecution complex that somehow my identity group is the only group that's getting the shaft? In other words, when are you going to grow the fuck up?
6
Actually yes. Labor unions are getting royally screwed too. It's going to be interesting to see how Obama regains their full support?
7
Isn't most of the progressive left feeling like they have to hound the President to live up to their expectations when they voted for him? The guy has hardly been the hard left, sweeping change leader that so many Democrat voters convinced themselves he would be back in November (not that there was any real basis to support that assumption).
The exceptional thing about the gay community in this regard is that Obama made very specific policy promises, including certain things (DADT repeal, for example) that he has the ability to get started on now, with minimal effort and relatively minimal expenditure of political capital. So yeah, you do have it worse than other core constituencies, but this "we're the oooooonly ones he's letting down" attitude is just a tad bit of an oversimplification.
The exceptional thing about the gay community in this regard is that Obama made very specific policy promises, including certain things (DADT repeal, for example) that he has the ability to get started on now, with minimal effort and relatively minimal expenditure of political capital. So yeah, you do have it worse than other core constituencies, but this "we're the oooooonly ones he's letting down" attitude is just a tad bit of an oversimplification.
8
By all means if what you want t be known for is for hounding him then have ago at it. All you will accomplish is turn more people against you and maybe end up in jail. Remember you are not going to be hounding and average joe, you are going to be harassing the President of the U.S and that's a federal crime. Just remember that there are already a pair of inbreed hicks in jail for trying to do the same. Do you want to be the next and join them?
Shame on Mr Savage for keeping this up.
Shame on Mr Savage for keeping this up.
9
OooooOoooo! Cressona done gave you tha bizness! He or she is right, too, because pretty much everyone is feeling like we got the ol' bait n switch with Obama.
10
Pop quiz: Are any other core Democrat constituency groups having to hound the president to live up to his campaign promises and rhetoric on their issues?
Yes, they are. Pretty much every core Democratic constituency you can think of is waiting for the President to deliver on his campaign promises. It's not just you.
11
LC, you do yourself more favors when you don't say stupid stuff like calling this a "federal crime." It most certainly is NOT. Trying to penetrate his gauntlet of Secret Service bodyguards might be a "federal crime," but organized protests at his public appearances are known as "freedom of assembly." Look it up.
13
Dan--like so many things, the truth here lies somewhere in the midddle.
Should Obama use the bully pulpit to speak out on behalf of equal rights for LGBT folks? Of course, and we should certainly hold his feet to the fire.
Should LGBT folks expect their agenda--all of it--to be up front and first on Obama's to-do list? Of course not. He is a bit busy, with probably the biggest mess ever to be handed to a new President in the history of the Republic.
Believe it or not, Dan, after years of wandering in the Bush Administration wilderness, there are a lot of progressive people lined up at Rahm's office, wanting a meeting.
Yes, we should continue to engage the administration, constructively criticizing the silence, while at the same time mobilizing our Congressional representatives to sponsor, co-sponsor, or at least SUPPORT upcoming legislation which will actually DO the things so many people keep (naively) expecting Obama himself to do. So, YES WE CAN do more than just sit around and complain, with our arms folded, expecting other people to do the work.
Obama's not a King and can't rule by decree. He has some limited power via executive order (and yes he should use his pen to SUSPEND the dismissals of qualified military personnel until the policy itself can be scrapped), but a lot of our agenda will take a lot of work by a lot of people, and it's a bit early to completely dismiss our barely-in-office President and his administration.
Show some political maturity, Dan. When you complain, how about you suggest a constructive way to respond as well.
Should Obama use the bully pulpit to speak out on behalf of equal rights for LGBT folks? Of course, and we should certainly hold his feet to the fire.
Should LGBT folks expect their agenda--all of it--to be up front and first on Obama's to-do list? Of course not. He is a bit busy, with probably the biggest mess ever to be handed to a new President in the history of the Republic.
Believe it or not, Dan, after years of wandering in the Bush Administration wilderness, there are a lot of progressive people lined up at Rahm's office, wanting a meeting.
Yes, we should continue to engage the administration, constructively criticizing the silence, while at the same time mobilizing our Congressional representatives to sponsor, co-sponsor, or at least SUPPORT upcoming legislation which will actually DO the things so many people keep (naively) expecting Obama himself to do. So, YES WE CAN do more than just sit around and complain, with our arms folded, expecting other people to do the work.
Obama's not a King and can't rule by decree. He has some limited power via executive order (and yes he should use his pen to SUSPEND the dismissals of qualified military personnel until the policy itself can be scrapped), but a lot of our agenda will take a lot of work by a lot of people, and it's a bit early to completely dismiss our barely-in-office President and his administration.
Show some political maturity, Dan. When you complain, how about you suggest a constructive way to respond as well.
14
I especially like the “pair of inbreed hicks.” It’s not quite as good as the classic “you MORAN!” but I give it points for originality.
15
You know if I wanted more Clintonian wishy-washy middle of the road giving into coroporate interests I would have voted for Hillary in the damn caucus!!
I am really not expecting much "change" from this guy at this point. He forgot (as did the Dems in Congress) that they had a powerful mandate; the biggest mandate for liberal social change since the election of 1932 and they fucked it off.
Hell, we still don't have as much as serious banking reform and FDR did that in his first 100 days.
I am really not expecting much "change" from this guy at this point. He forgot (as did the Dems in Congress) that they had a powerful mandate; the biggest mandate for liberal social change since the election of 1932 and they fucked it off.
Hell, we still don't have as much as serious banking reform and FDR did that in his first 100 days.
16
8, Except that more and more people are siding with us every day. Anti-civil rights folks like you keep losing ground. Gay people are not going away. Do you not get that? We are not going to suddenly disappear, nor will we stop demanding equality. Yes, people like you will keep trying to keep us on the back of the bus, but you'll only slow us down a bit. We will have marriage. You're losing.
17
Does anyone else think that Loveschild's registration got hacked or name got stolen? It really doesn't sound like the same woman who was around pre-registration. She's not even fun to debate with anymore. The arguments have become so incoherent and poorly written that there's just no point in trying to bring her back to rational thought, let alone a differing point of view.
I almost miss the real one. :,(
I almost miss the real one. :,(
18
While I'm disappointed over his lukewarm support for gay rights, especially DADT, since Obama took office, I'm glad we don't have another ideologue in the White House. One of the main themes from his campaign was consensus and broad appeal. He's a centrist. He has a more liberal mindset , but he's a centrist at heart. A lot of the hard left has been left by the wayside in the past few months, but I feel like he is planning for the long term, and he'll come around to these "hot button" issues.
19
Cracker Jack,
I don't think her account has been hacked at all. She has always been an ignorant bigot. She has her good days and bad days (in terms of her online speech) but the same hatred, closed minded attitude and entitlement ("I am better than you are so I am right... I am black so you can't have my same civil rights fight") is always there.
I don't think her account has been hacked at all. She has always been an ignorant bigot. She has her good days and bad days (in terms of her online speech) but the same hatred, closed minded attitude and entitlement ("I am better than you are so I am right... I am black so you can't have my same civil rights fight") is always there.
20
Cracker Jack, I’m with Akbar. I think she’s just further devolving, as bigots are prone to do. Give her a couple months and she’ll be back to primordial goo. If she hangs around long enough, maybe we’ll get a chance to witness the big bang…
21
And I'm trying to teach my child about patience....
Obama has been in office 130-ish days....please be patient. He is developing his game plan (trust me).
Pop Quiz: When someone is driving Dan, is he a backseat driver?
Obama has been in office 130-ish days....please be patient. He is developing his game plan (trust me).
Pop Quiz: When someone is driving Dan, is he a backseat driver?
22
I have to ask those who are riding the "Obama hasn't been in office long enough" train: When can we start questioning Obama's willingness/unwillingness to address issues? Give us a date!
23
Yes there are many who are disapointed.
HE screwed the Armenians and the comenters on Slog made fun of them and excused it.
He put wall st. types in power at treasury he has excluded single payer folks etc. etc. He's not prosecuting torture folks when he's obligated by law to do so. Just for starters.
Try a bit of hope, change, and, um, unity.
HE screwed the Armenians and the comenters on Slog made fun of them and excused it.
He put wall st. types in power at treasury he has excluded single payer folks etc. etc. He's not prosecuting torture folks when he's obligated by law to do so. Just for starters.
Try a bit of hope, change, and, um, unity.
25
@24 "He's not prosecuting torture folks when he's obligated by law to do so"
He is not obligated to do that, he's on the executive branch not judicial. Get it? Separation of powers...get it? Doubt it.
@22 Listen, I can question why my apple tree isn't giving me apples right now, but fortunately I understand that there are processes (you know developing and processing fruit carbohydrates) that need to take place. Plus those little tiny fruitlets answer my questions. Little itty-bitty hints.
But fuck it, I feel I NEED MY APPLE NOW! I will talk to that tree after work, and try to get an answer, but if she doesn't answer me I WILL CHOP IT DOWN!
pffft
He is not obligated to do that, he's on the executive branch not judicial. Get it? Separation of powers...get it? Doubt it.
@22 Listen, I can question why my apple tree isn't giving me apples right now, but fortunately I understand that there are processes (you know developing and processing fruit carbohydrates) that need to take place. Plus those little tiny fruitlets answer my questions. Little itty-bitty hints.
But fuck it, I feel I NEED MY APPLE NOW! I will talk to that tree after work, and try to get an answer, but if she doesn't answer me I WILL CHOP IT DOWN!
pffft
27
@25, the executive branch executes the laws of the land. You really ought to read the US Constitution before you speak out of your crusty layered asshole.
28
Hey, I voted for the black woman (Cynthia McKinney) who was The Green Party candidate. The Republicans have crazied themselves out of relevance. The Green Party (the new Left) will show just how conservative, and Centrist, the Democrats really are.
30
OK, when is SLOG gonna require registration for people to make posts?
These trolls are (should i say - this troll is) slightly annoying.
These trolls are (should i say - this troll is) slightly annoying.
31
30
Sit down, Genius, We'll break it to you slowly...
Slog
has had
R e g i s t r a t i o n
for several weeks.
This is the Nirvana you've dreamed of.
enjoy!
Sit down, Genius, We'll break it to you slowly...
Slog
has had
R e g i s t r a t i o n
for several weeks.
This is the Nirvana you've dreamed of.
enjoy!
32
@25 so you really insist that the Constitution states that United States attorneys (those appointed by the President and those responsible for "prosecuting torture folks") are in the executive? You are WRONG. The judiciary does not make law, but they do interpret and prosecute it.
No US president has ever prosecuted anybody.
(ps i've always considered someone crusty that finds references to the flowbee still funny)
No US president has ever prosecuted anybody.
(ps i've always considered someone crusty that finds references to the flowbee still funny)
33
@ 8; How many day have you spent in jail? You're black and religious so I assume you've had to have seen the inside of a cell at least once.
35
So...has no one at The Stranger heard the news about Olson and Boies filing suit?
=On Tuesday, lawyers Theodore B. Olson and David Boies, who represented opposing sides in the 2000 Bush v. Gore election challenge, announced they had filed a lawsuit in federal court on behalf of two gay men and two gay women.
Their case argues that California's voter-enacted ban on same-sex marriage, known as Proposition 8, violates the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection and due process.
Olson said he hopes the suit, which seeks a preliminary injunction against the California measure until the case is resolved, will wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court.=
SF Gate/AP
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg…
=On Tuesday, lawyers Theodore B. Olson and David Boies, who represented opposing sides in the 2000 Bush v. Gore election challenge, announced they had filed a lawsuit in federal court on behalf of two gay men and two gay women.
Their case argues that California's voter-enacted ban on same-sex marriage, known as Proposition 8, violates the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection and due process.
Olson said he hopes the suit, which seeks a preliminary injunction against the California measure until the case is resolved, will wind up before the U.S. Supreme Court.=
SF Gate/AP
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg…
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (36) RSS