Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
President Obama Betrays the Gay Community
We supported you. Time to live up to your promises
Team Obama keeps telling lesbian and gay Americans like me to be
patient. If we just wait a little longer, administration officials
whisper to us lovingly (and out of earshot of the media), after the
White House finishes with healthcare reform and getting the troops out
of Iraq, your time will come. In the meantime, cheer up -- we put a gay
band in the inaugural parade!
Everyone loves a parade, but we don't like being betrayed. And while
gay and lesbian Americans were initially willing to cut our new
president some slack, the president's now-clear reticence to follow
through on even one of his many campaign promises to the gay community
has put the Democratic Party on the precipice of an ugly and very
public divorce with this once-solid constituency.
During the presidential primaries, then-candidate Obama promoted
himself as the biggest defender of gay rights since Harvey Milk. He
would be a "fierce advocate" for our rights, he promised, and he even
out-gayed Hillary Clinton: telling gay and lesbian voters that while
she was for a partial repeal of the so-called Defense of Marriage Act
(DOMA), he'd get rid of the whole damn thing.
And there was much rejoicing.
Then, not so much.
About a year before the November election, primary challenger Obama
invited Donnie McClurkin, a homophobic gospel singer who claims to have
been "cured" of his own homosexuality, to lead a series of concerts in
the South in order to woo the black vote. The gays were not amused, but
candidate Obama held firm. The gays forgave the Big O until a year
later, when then-President-elect Obama chose evangelical preacher (and
well-known homophobe) Rick Warren to give the inaugural prayer. Again,
the gays expressed their ire, Obama wouldn't budge, and his advisors
continued to whisper sweet nothings in our ears about how glorious the
future would be once Dear Leader was finally in office.
But a funny thing happened on the way to equality. Rather than clouds
opening up and angels descending from on high, Barack Obama became
president and things never got better for the gays. In fact, they got
decidedly worse.
On taking office, Obama immediately announced that he was doing away
with the Clinton-era concept of special assistants who served as
liaisons to various communities like gays and Latinos. He then went
ahead and appointed special liaisons to some of those communities
anyway, but never to the gays. Around the same time, the White House
Web site, once detailing half a page of presidential promises to the
gay community, overnight saw those pledges shortened to three simple
sentences. Gone were five of the eight previous commitments, including
the promises to repeal both Don't Ask Don't Tell and DOMA. Adding to a
growing sense of angst, senior White House officials kept telling the
media that they weren't sure when, if ever, the president would follow
through on his promises to the gay community. Then there were the
Cabinet appointees. Three Latino nominees but nary a gay in sight. And
finally, last week our president had his Department of Justice file a brief in defense of DOMA,
a law he had once called "abhorrent." In that brief, filed on the 42nd
anniversary of the Supreme Court ruling in Loving v. Virginia (which
outlawed bans on interracial marriage), our own interracial Harvey
Milk, not lacking a sense of historical irony, compared our love to
incest and pedophilia.
Shit, meet fan.
Tonight, President Fierce will try to make amends by signing either a
memorandum, a directive or an executive order, directing some federal
agencies, but not others, to provide some benefits, but not others, to
some gay federal employees, but not others, at some undisclosed time in
the future. (And the benefits may reportedly go away when Obama leaves
office.)
First problem, federal agencies already have the right to provide these
benefits to gay employees -- and several, including at least one DOD
agency, do. Second problem, the administration can’t tell us exactly
which benefits they’re talking about and for which employees. That’s
because this was all hastily thrown together after the incestuous and
pedophilic gays nearly brought down a Democratic National Committee gay
pride fundraiser scheduled for next week. A gay blogger got hold of the
event’s guest list and published it,
and once D.C.’s gay paper, the Washington Blade, announced that it
would be staking out the entrance to the event with camera and video,
the $1,000 a head attendees started dropping like flies.
In other words, the only reason we're getting anything: The gay ATM ran dry.
Don't get me wrong. Some federal employees getting some benefits at
some future point is definitely something. But it's not an answer to
why this president directed his Department of Justice to defend a law
he previously opposed when he didn't have to.
It doesn't explain why the DOMA brief linked a key Democratic
constituency to pedophilia and incest. Or why this president has
already overseen the discharge of 253 gay service members, and has
refused to issue a stop-loss order ceasing those discharges. Or why he
won't lift a finger to push Congress to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell.
The president would like us to believe that he's awfully busy being
president, and if we only wait a little while longer, we'll get our
rights. Of course, the president isn't too busy to stab the community
in the back by continuing the military discharges, defending DOMA, and
comparing us to pedophiles. (On Wednesday, White House spokesperson
Robert Gibbs was given a chance to repudiate the DOMA brief's language
about incest and pedophilia and would not.)
When,
Mr. President, will be a good time to set my people free? When will the
leader of the free world get a breather, a presidential timeout as it
were? (And I thought this was the administration that could walk and
chew gum at the same time.) Are we really to believe that 2010, a
congressional election year, will be any more timely than today? Or
2011, the beginning of the presidential primaries? Or 2012, with a
congressional and presidential election? There is quite literally no
time like the present.
The real problem is that Team Obama is stuck in 1993. Perhaps some
advisor has convinced our once-fierce advocate that gay rights is the
third rail of presidential politics. Just look at what happened to
President Clinton 16 years ago when he tried to help the gays, the
insider is likely warning.
But 2009 is not 1993. Sixty-seven percent of Americans now favor granting same-sex couples the right to marry
or join in civil unions. Sixty-nine percent support letting openly gay
men and lesbian women serve in our military, including a majority of
Republicans (58 percent), conservatives (58 percent),
and even churchgoers (60 percent). And an overwhelming number of
Americans have long since supported passing legislation banning job
discrimination against gays.
The controversy is in President Obama's mind -- at least it was until
it became real and moved to the Democratic Party's pocketbook.
What can the president do to avoid outright rupture with the gay
community? He needs to start fulfilling his campaign promises -- even
one would be a nice start. He needs to stop the discharges, and stop
the Falwellian legal briefs in support of a policy he opposes. He needs
to push -- really push -- for legislation banning job discrimination,
repealing DOMA, and lifting Don't Ask Don't Tell.
Many of us were willing to cut our new president some slack. Not anymore.
- Posted in



64 Comments so far
Show AllYou and everyone else except the corrupt and greedy good ol boys who he serves.
You're better off without a liaison anyway. The one to the "progressives" is little more than a "yes" man pitching the obama product.
I hope he pisses off the Gays--they are the only ones well-organized and effective enough to get anything done since the emergence of "Act Up".
With each passing day he gets worse.
He is worse than Bush because we expected better than Bush at the very least.
You can have an inarticulate crook in the white house, or
You can have a smooth talking crook in the white house (Snowbama makes slick willy look rough around the edges)
Take your pick.
In other words, you can have either a Republican or a Democrat in the white house. We need to change that.
deleted
i have been beaten to the punch for my mirthful insights on this puppy, the posts below say it all
we the sheeple are now we the saps
its a shame because with all the crap flowing downstream these days - we could use a good man in the whitehouse
we did our part
we found a candidate who expoused our beliefs and even one who challenged us to "hope" reflecting full knowledge of the lies and deceit that has made us cynical over the years
we had, we thought, a candidate who understood our despair and who would give voice to our hopes and dreams
we bought the line - hook, line and sinker
we now have to burrow down for 8 years of fascist banking nwo/control of our beloved country that is now so far from home
Ever notice the numerous double binds we find ourselves in?
The ones who vowed to "hold his feet to the fire" were more than willing to give Obama a pass with the mounting evidence of blanket betrayal. Obama was not even swinging to the "Center", he was carrying the torch for the NeoCons.
Now we hear that it is up to us to pressure Obama when he dismisses us.
Seems the only thing that he understands is money.
This is worth remembering every time they tell us "we can't afford it" or that we have to cut "entitlements":
It is exceedingly difficult to convey exactly how much we are spending on all these bailouts. Whenever I start talking trillions (versus mere billions), I get puzzled looks from people. Humans have a hard time conceptualizing any number that large. I wanted a graphic way to clearly show how astonishingly ginormous the amounts involved were.
So I once again went to Jess Bachman at Wallstats. This Bailout Nation graphic shows the the total costs to the taxpayer of all the monies spent, lent, consumed, borrowed, printed, guaranteed, assumed or otherwise committed. It is nothing short of astonishing.
It includes the total outlay for all the bailouts to date. In just about one short year (march 2008 - March 2009), the bailouts managed to spend far in excess nearly every major one time expenditure of the USA, including WW2, the moon shot, the New Deal, Iraq, Viet Nam and Korean wars — COMBINED.
206 years versus 12 months. Total cost: ~$15 trillion and counting . . .
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/06/bailout-costs- vs-big-historical-events/
Repeat:
In just about one short year (march 2008 - March 2009), the bailouts managed to spend far in excess nearly every major one time expenditure of the USA, including WW2, the moon shot, the New Deal, Iraq, Viet Nam and Korean wars — COMBINED.
The nation's treasury looted as far as the eye can see and Obama administers a bandaid?
The president would like us to believe that he's awfully busy being president, and if we only wait a little while longer, we'll get our rights.
All you'll get is older. On top of being a liar, a coward, an opportunist, the fount of a rapidly growing cult of personality and the star of The Borax Obysmal Show, our current prez may also be a homophobe. Just as the George Wanker Bush regime employed reactionary African Americans because they had too (even though they didn't want to), Obysmal may express pro forma support for gays while thinking they all ought to go to Hell. Don't laugh. This guy has rapidly turned out to be a real snake in the grass.
Mordechai - I always appreciate your insights.
Let's not forget that Obama, without much fanfare, actually broadened the faith-based initiative. This is same that had so many liberals and progressives worried about when Bush II first implemented it. Tie the two together - sell out of the gays - promotion of a concept that flies in the face of traditional separation of church and state legal stance.
His performance on the issue has been very disappointing and conservatives are having a field day gloating about "our" candidate betraying us. If they can see it, anyone can. I cannot imagine what Obama thinks he's doing. The people he is wooing hate him with a passion and nothing will change that. Nothing. But in the course of wooing them, he is losing the very people who put him in office.
President Obama has already BETRAYED everyone except the hardcore rightwing and now it's time to TERMINATE his political career. IMPEACH, REMOVE, and JAIL him and Congress members as well except for those who actually stand up for us.
Just another homocidal looting liar.
Oooooohhh, Obama is just simply...horrid!
But he talks so nice, and his wife dresses lovely!
For the life of me, I can't figure out why O is so eager to please the right. All this talk about compromise, and governing toward the center. Who cares about what the goddamn republicans think? They lost, they're a dying party. Let 'em go to hell! The Dems are in charge.
It's time to move full steam ahead on a liberal agenda. Gay rights, health care, banking reforms, peace. Let's hold O's feet to fire and force him to live up to his campaign promises. We need to move ahead on these issues while we still have the chance!
I'm laughing my ass off right now, Markymark! You silly fool. You never had a chance, even before the election, to hold his feet to the fire and now that he is the Gun Wielder-in-Chief of Fortress Amerika, do you think he has to listen to you or anyone else? He's chosen (or had chosen for him and I think it's the former) his advisers and the people he will listen to. You, the people, ain't it.
It has become obvious that whoever is elected as Dictator will turn around and bite you. They can do this because your votes didn't count nor are you the ones that feed them. Simple.
Obama is a fink. Always has been.
There is no there there.
We need a March On Washington.
But not for a single issue.
Obama and Congress have now lied about a long list of things.
They are not funding science and new technology. They are funding their old buddies with bankrupt companies.
They are not pulling out of war. They are expanding wars.
Now they are lying about reforming health care and providing universal coverage.
March on Washington.
Like in Iran.
queerplanet-
You are 100% Absolutely Completely ON. THE. MONEY-
Black Obama is more (Dan) White, than he is sympatico w/ Harvey Milk's Spirit.
Obama's lies could be rammed back down his throat with-
The March For Hope and Change, on DC as you say. But rather than linear, it should be organized like the spokes on a bike wheel, DC the target/hub, w/ us incoming from multiple directions, the Village, Maine, SF, Philly, Pittsburgh, everywhere. A convergence on the white house.
Resist or become serfs. chrishedges.
Well, the Third Party voters told everyone before the election that Obama was telling everyone what they wanted to hear.
Now you know it via experience.
The question now is, what do you intend to do about it?
Lets see, we can dish Ralph Nader for a start. Didn't he divide the Democrat Party, that grand institution that will lead us to the light? We had to put up with 8 years of war and betrayal and--oh, that's right, it's still going on. But I thought the Democrats were in control now.
elohim,
I need advice, you throw "what do you intend to do about it?" down pretty hard.
That is fine. I would be happy to vote for Nader, do anything for peace,
okay elohim, what DO YOU INTEND to do that will save one life in Central Asia?
Or cause any positive change? nader says he runs to raise consciousness, well, okay, great, great. But he has been running for two decades and look at the US.
So what do you intend to do that will help people? Because as far as I can see, no vote for anyone has done any good since FDR. And there is not one square centimeter of moral high ground available-that comes from having helped hungry or hurting people, have you done either of those 2 things?
But I defer, tell me what to do. You are wiser that I. I am a pupil.
az, your redundancy speaks volumes. Since we have had this discussion before, presumably I can conclude that either you are 1) someone who makes a career out of being a twit, or 2) you like to cast dispersions draped in obfuscations to defer your own responsibility. If I were to venture a guess, perhaps both.
Prior to the election, this author, like many others were advocating for Obama proclaiming him to be the second coming. They voted for him. They worked to get him elected. Suddenly, reality is sinking in, now they see the man for what he is: a right of center corporate 'yes' man.
My question was legitimate. If they don't like his policies that sweep a few crumbs off the table, I ask, now what? My guess is that in four years they will suck up their bold vocabulary, and vote for him again. If that is indeed the case, then the implication is they are frigging cowards who cannot walk their talk.
I am under no such delusion. The difference is between being self validating by accepting the consequences of my vote. I have voted Third Party or Independent candidacy like Nader since 1975.
I am not complicate in the duopoly. I made my choice a long time ago. My vote is a protest vote until a threshold is reached. It will be reached when others take up another option other than believing in a fairly tale which tells us to "hold the Democrats feet to the fire, or push to move them to the left." As we have seen repeatedly, it is a disempowered philosophy.
When enough people finally have had enough, we will cross a threshold. Third Party viability will then become the norm. How long it takes is up to people like you.
Your condescending attributes say more for your dis-empowered state, lad, than it does about my praxis. Advice? Try getting out of you excuse mode ad nausea.
The question is can you do the same, can you take responsibility for voting outside the two party box?
Furthermore, not that this is any of your business, but I have worked in the environmental and non profit world all my life for sub-standard pay. So what I am doing about it is walking my talk, embodying my values.
I know you like to switch and bait, AZJoe, the question remains what are your going to do about it besides whimper, put your tail between your legs, and crawl back to Obama in four years from now?
Wow elohim, that was a pretty mean post!
But that's okay, I don't blame you. I voted for BO, defended him, and God, I was stupid, Totally. But I cannot do better than owning up to a mistake and trying to move forward.
I am going to advocate for and try to be part of the Green Party I think, I've said lately I would maybe vote for Ralph Nader, but probably Green.
elohim, the animosity in your post is palpable. Insults. Hatred. That is your prerogative of course. But I cannot return it to you.
Because I am hoping you are happy and smiling and loving life! sincerely, joe.
(Let's avoid each other if you hate me, must insult me, speak of my tail between my legs, but if you ever want to be nice, that would be wonderful.)
AZ don't mistake assertiveness for hate. I don't hate anyone.
And as far as avoiding you, I have. Ive never responded to you EXCEPT as a rebuttal against your attacks on me.
So avoid me; I will do the same.
elohim, assertiveness is NOT characterized by personal insults, you tell me my "tail is between my legs," then call yourself "assertive?" That is not assertive! That is (you are) ugly-aggressive!
Your analysis of your own rhetoric is most generous. Don't be an insulting hater then turn around and call yourself assertive. That makes you stupid or a liar or both. Most likely both, no offense.
I love it, The Aggressive Progressive. Who attacks people! errr growl!
Aggressive Progressives! Right. On. "Think like me or I'll attack you, by the way war sucks." Conflicted to the core!
Oh yeah, you 100% had Zero response to this question-HOW did a vote for a great, great man, Nader, save 1 life in Cental Asia? Oh yeah, it did not. Hard to handle for you?
Green Party. Thank you for making me smile over coffee.
I'm gonna bong some hash now. I'll be back, you whip up a little response, I'll look forward to it!
Joe,I see your offer to ignore me lasted less than two hours; kinda like the attention span for your average Obama supporter, I suppose. Just your typical emasculated male response, forever domesticated by his circumstances. I did not expect anything less. Carry on!
elohim, hope you are well! I'm gonna vote Green, realized I was wrong on obomba and hope to help cause some positive change, how, I am honestly not sure... A 3rd/Green party though for sure. I was new to voting last fall. I now notice many wise posters supporting the Green Party though, so that may be the way. Cheers, joe.
Everyone that didn't get 'chills up their legs' at the pure thought of Obama warned that his core knew nothing about him. You guys had hope and nothing else, and now you don't have that.
You guys got what you deserved...and what you voted for. A big empty balloon with 'hope and change' written on the side.
I disagree politically with most of you. But one thing we can agree on is that Obama is not at all what he promised. The difference is that I didn't vote for him. The responsibility is yours.
One
Big
Ass
Mistake
America
Third Party People Were Right and Are Still Right!
Third Party 2012
RON PAUL 2012!
I've long felt that Obama has consigned the popular "countercultural" politics and values of the Sixties to the Sphere of Deviance. Such that any group even distantly (or inaccurately) considered left-of-center is Unclean in his eyes.
And, in a manner reminiscent of Clarence Thomas, Obama has reaped the benefits of identity politics, but in important respects repudiates and eschews them when it suits his Agenda.
So yes, Obama has proudly performed the clichéd ritual of the Liberal pol who when campaigning, cozies up to minority constituencies and interest groups with vague promises or affirmations of alliance-- then slowly backtracks over the horizon once elected.
Wham! Bam! Thank you, man!
· Yr Obd't Servant
President Obama betrays the
Gay
Anti-war
Anti-bankster
Anti-secrecy
Anti-torture
Single-payer
Anti-mountaintop removal
community.
BO supporters - have ya learned yer lesson yet? Let's test: he promised to create a paltry 600k jobs in 3 months? Do you believe him? If you're answer is yes, please read this post from the beginning...
You forgot one more group:
pro-Cannabis
maxpayne,
Not exactly, I live and grow in Northern Cal where 40% of US bud comes from. The heat is off. Obama/The Justice Department stated they'd leave us alone if we followed our state/county guidelines.
This contrasts with the previous policy of raiding our asses and claiming Federal laws were the basis for this. A few days ago the Supreme Court refused to hear a challenge to prop 215. It's over. AB390 will make pot legal in a year or two in cali-
And the party is ON.
In fact, I'm gonna do some ice bongs right now.
peace maxpayne, hope you are high as a kite and loving life!
It's already weird enough that North Dakota is getting cannabis legalized faster than California. Both Gray Davis and Arnold have always veteoed bills pertaining to legalizing the crop even for industrial purposes. Good luck in CA.
Nice one bro. Which reminds me...
Sioux Rose
FRANK: I was thinking along the same lines. What would cause such an overt degree of hubris? Could it be the certainty that the groups that own the media and the election voting software will enjoy the benefits he's sending their way and thus with their insider support the alienation of his "base" is of no importance? I can understand not pleasing all the people all the time; but selling out on EVERY major support group (except those directly affiliated with Mammon/Wall St/big corporations and Mars/MIC) would be political suicide were he not given a sense of confidence from some inordinately high places.
Definitely! If white men hadn't been doing it for decades, I'd call him a "house---" oops, I'm in danger of being politically uncorrect, or is it incorrect. He's serving the mansion, and making the rest of us go to the back door.
"EVERY major support group (except those directly affiliated with Mammon/Wall St/big corporations and Mars/MIC)"
Perfect. There are so many good groups being betrayed I couldn't keep track of them myself. Thanks.
Thank you John for so clearly expressing my views too!!!
Obama is a huge disappointment on sooo many levels and regarding so many issues.
I am close to removing my Obama bumpersticker from my car and I certainly am not sending barackobama.com any more money .
I love americablog, am a steady reader. Thank you.
"I am close to removing my Obama bumpersticker from my car and I certainly am not sending barackobama.com any more money."
"close to"...
Unbelievable. It's a great joke, if it's a joke..
If not, you sound just like a die-hard Bush supporter. Never admit your own ignorance. Never lose "hope". Emotion always trumps reason.
You should not be disappointed in Obama. You should be disappointed in yourself for not investigating Obama's policy statements prior to the election. Yes, he has betrayed some promises. But it's been clear what he stands for since his election to the Senate.
I sure hope you mean you've scraped it down to the metal and haven't yet gotten the right acid to remove the glue.
The really funny thing about all these comments is that all the people currently bashing Obama.... VOTED FOR HIM.
I hope you all remember this in 2012 when you get another vote. Stay home, or vote third party. >(
And don't believe the progressive newswire that tells you 2008 isn't Nader's year. Oops, I mean 2004. No, I meant 2000. Now, I meant .... This goes back to the 70's. It's never [insert third party candidate who is for REAL CHANGE here]'s year. JUST KEEP VOTING THE SAME.
Wrong, what makes you think everyone bashing this creep voted for Obama? Some of us do have 3-digit IQs.
McCain was going to be Bush's 3rd term. Obama's Cheney's 1st. And I saw it coming back in 2007.
The one good thing coming out of Obama's behavior, as far as I can see, is that so many who voted for him will never vote for a Dem again. Now is the time to pour energy into third (and fourth) party candidates. Obama needs to know that his re-election is in no way assured. I for one will not vote for him.
Obama is just trying to limit the power of the people he opposes.
The people he opposes are the ones who got him elected.
Oh Wanderer that was the absolute funniest thing I've heard in days! True, sad funny ironic-nice! But oh too true. If you threw that together yourself, doubly nice. re-spectfully.
If everyone Obama has betrayed would stop drinking the blue koolaid for one second and vote for the Green Party in 2010, then we'd see some change we can believe in.
If a third-party made progress in getting seats in Congress before trying for the presidency, they'd be more credible.
Any one having deja vu? Seems like Clinton (the male one) did this to us a few years ago. How many times must it happen before queers start thinking about voting independent.
I no longer disbelieve the story about Nobama, cocaine, a limosine, and driver....
He is gay in the same way that Larry Craig, Mark Foley, and their ilk are.