Sunday, June 14, 2009
But you have to support him anyway...
...No we don't. Most people I know were behind Obama right up until the other day when that brief was submitted. Of course the Democrats are better than the Republicans, no one doubts that. At the same time "somewhat better" is simply not good enough.
There are many in the community who say the President needs more time before he can address ANY of the issues facing the community. Others urge more pressure on. Lets do both. I'm ready to be fully supportive again once a few questions are answered satisfactorily.
How long we are expected to wait? To what end do we support the Administration without knowing anything of its plan (and worse, its lack of action)? Do we wait until after the 2010 midterms to 'protect our majority'? Do we wait until the end of 2012 after he is reelected? Or do we wait until the 2014 midterms to keep Congress? Perhaps we are expected to wait until year 7 of his administration (assuming he hasn't tossed aside so many supporters that he loses). Perhaps they will ask us to hold off until 2017, because, after all, we don't want to lose the White House.
Let's look at exactly what we are asking for:
is (was?) better than the alternative, however it was simply not necessary to submit to the Court what is the most harmful (and hurtful) governmental attack on us as a people that I have seen in my lifetime, without an explanation. The government, THE government, of Barack Obama has entered heinous arguments supporting DOMA forever in the legal records of the United States of America.
Thanks for that... Now the right wing forever will be able to use those arguments with the full backing of the Obama Administration. I can see that brief ending up in Prop 8 commercials all over California: "Gays are tied to pedophilia, make crappy parents and are bad for the economy. The Obama Administration says so." Pathetic but, based on what we have seen on paper so far, true.
No doubt there are very legitimate reasons for the administration wanting the Supremes to not grant cert on this case. That being said, there are a couple of matters the political folks may want to address:
I am curious. If not now, when? At a minimum we are owed the answer to that question.
There are many in the community who say the President needs more time before he can address ANY of the issues facing the community. Others urge more pressure on. Lets do both. I'm ready to be fully supportive again once a few questions are answered satisfactorily.
How long we are expected to wait? To what end do we support the Administration without knowing anything of its plan (and worse, its lack of action)? Do we wait until after the 2010 midterms to 'protect our majority'? Do we wait until the end of 2012 after he is reelected? Or do we wait until the 2014 midterms to keep Congress? Perhaps we are expected to wait until year 7 of his administration (assuming he hasn't tossed aside so many supporters that he loses). Perhaps they will ask us to hold off until 2017, because, after all, we don't want to lose the White House.
Let's look at exactly what we are asking for:
1. DADT: Repeal of a law that Congress passed and the President signed to shaft gays.No doubt that Obama
2. DOMA: Repeal of a law that Congress passed and the President signed to shaft gays.
3. ENDA: Job protections that leave us without protection from housing, lending or public accommodation discrimination.
(Hate crimes don't count. Not one life has been saved by them and I want protections before my skull is bashed in on a sidewalk. Plus, does anyone really think the increased funds for local law enforcement will go to protect gays where the protections are needed most? And as Frank Rich said "fighting AIDS is not a get-out-of-homophobia-free card." )
Thanks for that... Now the right wing forever will be able to use those arguments with the full backing of the Obama Administration. I can see that brief ending up in Prop 8 commercials all over California: "Gays are tied to pedophilia, make crappy parents and are bad for the economy. The Obama Administration says so." Pathetic but, based on what we have seen on paper so far, true.
No doubt there are very legitimate reasons for the administration wanting the Supremes to not grant cert on this case. That being said, there are a couple of matters the political folks may want to address:
1. Our community needs to hear from our President. It is astonishing to me that, as someone pointed out, Barack Obama has said more publicly about his dog Bo and going to Five Guys for burgers than he has addressed gay rights since January 20. If that is the case, the President who claims that he is our "fiercest advocate" or our supposedly pro gay Attorney General should explain exactly why they claim that mantle. These are not state secrets.
2. I wrote earlier that "I agree with Jonathan Capehart's call for President Obama to give a speech on the 40th anniversary of Stonewall. I also think that if nothing comes by that date we need to significantly ramp up the pressure. He gets way too much help - financial and organizing - to continue his silence."
There is a point where we have to say we will not be complicit in this by following blindly. If we are wrong, why the secrecy? We keep saying to the GOP "you have no plan?" Well without an explanation the Democrats have told us that they have no plan either.As long as tens of millions are being spent by the Pentagon to enforce Don't Ask, Don't Tell, gays should say to politicians "you have our money, go get it back from Secretary Gates."
3. The March (or whatever it's renamed these days) was pretty much on the road to failure. Then this. If the blogs are any indication, the action of the DOJ has infused a new sense of urgency. Hotel reservations are being made and unlike the marches before it, there is absolutely no central organizing going on. This has all the ingredients for a recipe for disaster. The best recruiters in the country for the October 11 march date are Barack Obama and Eric Holder.
4. Silence = Death and the west wing has been awfully quiet.
I am curious. If not now, when? At a minimum we are owed the answer to that question.
By: Michael Rogers
|