Let the celebrations begin. And through inauguration and the "first 100 days" enthusiasm will be high, and LGBT Democratic activists will tell us that a new dawn is upon us, led by the one for whom we have been waiting and his chosen party. They will be insufferable.
But sometime early in 2009, the country will come to some inconvenient truths, as will gay voters. Obama has pledged to introduce legislation that attempts to provide tax credits to all earning less than $250,000 while simultaneously using the federal troth to send checks to those who don't pay income taxes, while also providing subsidized health care and college tuition, plus trillions more in new pork-barrel spending to fulfill the promises Obama has made unto the masses.
The struggling economy won't react well to raising capital gains and dividends taxes as a matter of "fairness," and hugely increasing income and social security taxes on "the rich," along with the many regulatory overreach steps that the Democrats will quickly pass. Add to the mix anti-trade protectionism, the rapid elimination of secret ballots for union elections, and unleashing the trial lawyers to bring suit against corporate America without even modest restraints (the new "pay equity" act will allow the plaintiffs' bar to reach back over 20 years to find discrimination and sue sue sue). Growth will stagnate, unemployment will rise, incomes will fall, and Obama and congressional Democrats will only be able to blame the Bush administration for so long, though they will try mightily.
On foreign policy, let's take Joe Biden at his word and expect the worst.
On the LGBT front, some Obama loyalists at the Human Rights Campaign and elsewhere will be awarded mid-level positions in Washington's alphabet bureaucracies. They will use these posts to defend Obama from critiques that he is not delivering on his promises to the LGBT community, much as Clinton's LGBT appointments defended his support of the Defense of Marriage Act and "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."
There will be quick passage of a "hate crimes" bill federalizing prosecution of crimes committed with animus against select Democratic-voting constituencies. There will be the Employee Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which even John McCain said he was willing to consider signing. It will not, however, include a "GENDA" component that prohibits employers from discriminating against crossdressers -- and that will split LGBT activists who have made the "T" a litmus test for progressivism (think National Gay & Lesbian Task Force) from the LGBT Obamist apologists (think Human Rights Campaign). It won't be pretty. And if the intramural fighting gets ugly enough, there won't be any ENDA at all.
Don't look for action on the military gay ban, either. Obama has said (though the LGBT press passed over it) that he's going to go slow and rely on the military's advice here. Gen. Colin Powell, newly minted Obamist and one of the fathers (with former Sen. Sam Nunn) of "don't ask, don't tell" (i.e., "lie and hide") will provide him with cover.
The Democrats will control all the reins for two years. As their mask of moderation falls away and their contradictory promises work out in favor of traditional big government, big labor, anti-growth statism, support will wither. They will loss Congress in 2010.
GOP at the Crossroads
The Republican party has a choice. If John McCain turns out to be the last GOP presidential nominee willing to forsake gay bashing and oppose amending the U.S. Constitution to ban marriage for committed, loving same-sex couples, then the party will tread backwards. And if our only choice in the years to come is between a redistributionist regulatory state and reactionary social conservatism, America's future will be bleak.
(I've bumped up into a new post my observations on the win for state marriage bans that had been here.)
25 Comments for “The Forthcoming Rude Awakening”
posted by Bobby on
My best friend voted for Obama because he says that McCain is too old. This is a guy that rarely reads a newspaper, doesn’t watch Fox News (or any news), thinks all politicians are crooks and didn’t even like Obama until the last minute. He wasn’t even planning on voting. But in the end, he voted, probably to tell all his friends that he voted for Obama.
That’s what it was. A silly popularity contest based not on ideas but empty promises.
It’s obvious that the people want change no matter the cost. Hitler, Chavez and Pol Pot also promised change, and they also had the youth vote on their side. I hope Americans are happy with their choice, I hope they don’t mind experimenting with socialism. Hell, according to Biden, it’s patriotic to pay taxes, right? And you can bet your ass pretty soon we’re all gonna be very patriotic.
It’s all about change. All about having the first black president so we can tell the world that we’re not a bunch of racists. Great! The only difference between Jessee Jackson and Obama is that Barrack knows how to talk in generalities and sound like a moderate when he’s anything but.
Well, now that the liberals are in control, perhaps we should change the name of The White House to The Black House or The People’s House. “White” is so offensive, we can’t have none of that anymore!
posted by Attmay on
No, it’ll be the RED house.
We’ll have gay marriage and be too poor to afford it.
posted by randy on
Bitter much?
posted by Rob on
Alphabet bureaucracies? Bobby has friends?
Now is the time to push hard on the House and Senate to repeal DADT and DOMA. The Dems have little excuses to do so now that the cards are stacked in their favour. I’m not buying into that higher priorities crap they’ve dished in 2006. Come to think of it… isn’t that also a favourite argument of the gay Repubs when they justify voting for candidates that voted against our interests?
Anyway, higher priorities my arse, it shouldn’t be ignored next congress. It’s called multitasking and streamlining. I don’t think Obama would dare veto the repeal of DADT, and he has indicated that he would approve of congress to repeal DOMA.
posted by Carl on
Steven, do you have any comments on the huge amounts of money and support that LDS put into funding and passing Prop 8? The media, and many gay conservatives, will likely focus on ethnic minorities, but since you’re reminding us of the crossroads, shouldn’t we also be worried about the increasing power the Mormon Church seems to have over our lives?
posted by Ashpenaz on
I want to thank Stonewall and Pride parades everywhere for creating this wonderful backlash which has succeeded in preventing me from marrying all over the country! I’m not one to say I told you so, but. . .
posted by Pat on
Ashpenaz, I’m disappointed that the same sex marriage bans passed as well. But I’ll thank Stonewall and Pride parades everywhere for the ever increasing tolerance and acceptance of gay persons and freedom, and for marriage in Massachusetts and Connecticut, and soon in New Jersey and New York.
Carl, it’s kind of freaky that a group from out of state would fund so much money to strip rights from others. There’s sick people out there, what can I say? But I can’t blame them too much. It’s the voters from California that voted for the measure. If any voters let bigoted churches’ advertising influence their vote to Yes, shame on the voters.
Bobby, you sound like me the day after Bush somehow got re-elected in 2004. I’ve been over it for four years now, although I still shake my head in disbelief every now and then. If Obama is as bad as you think he’ll be (and it wouldn’t shock me), then at least we can vote him out in 2012, and not re-elect him like we did with Bush.
posted by Jorge on
Sheesh! Couldn’t you have at least waited a day before posting all this hyperventilating drivel? We have a new president-elect. This is something that only happens once every four years. And there’s also the symbolism of Obama being the first black president. I’m pretty disappointed with the result but all this can come later.
posted by Bobby on
“Bobby, you sound like me the day after Bush somehow got re-elected in 2004. I’ve been over it for four years now, although I still shake my head in disbelief every now and then. If Obama is as bad as you think he’ll be (and it wouldn’t shock me), then at least we can vote him out in 2012, and not re-elect him like we did with Bush.”
—I hope you’re right. Obama worries me, he’s gonna come out after righwing radio with the Fairness Doctrine, he’s gonna try to censor Fox News, and I doubt the liberal media will criticize him unless he goes against their liberal principles. Now I could be wrong, Obama could be the next Bill Clinton, take republican ideas and claim them as his own. However, I’m a skeptic.
“Bobby has friends?”
—Some people find me fascinating.
“And there’s also the symbolism of Obama being the first black president. ”
—And why is that important? Are we electing a symbol? Why not vote for Paris Hilton? Do we have to be so race-obsessed that every single thing is about race, color, gender, sexual orientation and religion? Can we not vote ideology? Geraldine Ferraro was right, if Obama had been white, he would not have won the nomination, much less the presidency.
posted by David Skidmore on
Bobby, Fox News is an oxymoron. The Onion contains more facts and at least doesn’t spew anti-gay filth.
posted by Mark F. on
The GOP had a fiscally conservative, anti-war, gay tolerant candidate named Ron Paul. They might give his ideas a look again in 2012.
posted by Bobby on
Fox News is NOT homophobic
posted by Kewl on
Dust off your white suit and do the Hustle! It’s 1976 all over again. Then, an unknown Democratic candidate is elected President because the electorate is angry over Watergate. Incompetence at all levels follows and four years later Jimmy loses in a landslide.
The electorate now chooses Obama in anger over the economic crisis caused by a housing bubble.
The only difference between Jimmy and Barack is that Bam will be even more disastrous. He is a true-blue leftist ideologue and like all leftists he doesn’t know how to govern only shout slogans that will get old really quick. The country will turn against him within the first 6 months.
I want a front row seat to the spectacle. Watch his hair turn white before our eyes like it did Jimmy’s. Watch the Congress turn against him as they see the mid-term elections around the corner. Obama will do a great deal of harm to the country and destroy the Democratic party.
posted by bls on
I see the usual suspects are blaming other gay people – and Democrats – for the fact that Republicans can’t get elected dogcatcher anymore.
Well, nice work if you can get it – although I’d think a little introspection might be helpful at this point.
This site is really very amazing (or was that amusing?) sometimes….
posted by Gene on
The fact that 70% of African-Americans, 75% of AA Women, 25% of Obama voters and a strong majority of Hispanics contributed to the passing of Prop 8 is incredibly ironic…to me, anyway. Especially, when I see that a slight majority of white voters opposed Prop 8.
I’ll be honest here…I don’t really care. Number one, I don’t live in CA. But frankly, I’ve been with someone for 10 years and if we never get married, I couldn’t care less. But that’s just me. I’d prefer to see marriage as solely a religious institution with no legal ramifications whatsoever. I just don’t care.
I would, however, like to see SOME recognition of the bigotry that exists within the traditionally Democratic, rabidly socially conservative and yes, religious, ethnic groups that exist on the left.
Bigotry is bigotry, period. Let’s acknowledge that it is prevalent on both sides. As a libertarian/conservative, I am more than willing to criticize people like James Dobson. But when I see stats about Prop 8 like I’ve seen, I really wonder why gays have become so beholden to the Democratic party.
posted by Pat on
But when I see stats about Prop 8 like I’ve seen, I really wonder why gays have become so beholden to the Democratic party.
Gene, I agree that bigotry is bigotry, no matter which party, ethnic group, etc., that it comes from. But break the stats further, and what do we find? That 82% of Republicans and 85% of conservatives voted for Prop. 8, while 64% of Democrats and 78% of liberals voted against Prop. 8. Break it down further, and we see that 79% of White Democrats voted against Prop. 8.
Sure, these percentages show that there are gay friendly Republicans and anti-gay Democrats. We should support any person who are truly gay supportive no matter what party. However, as long as we get statistics like I just quoted, we see why gay persons overwhelmingly support Democrats.
posted by Bobby on
“Bobby, Fox News is an oxymoron. The Onion contains more facts and at least doesn’t spew anti-gay filth.”
—It was the only network that wasn’t in love with Obama, the only network that reported Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayres, and all the dirty little secrets about Obama before the other networks even bother to look into it.
Even today the media is lying, they’re covering this election as a historic event, they’re pretending that everyone is happy. But Obama only won with 54% of the popular vote, that means 46% of the American people are not happy about it.
At least Fox covers BOTH sides of the story. Whatever, lefties like you had fun bashing Bush, we’re gonna have fun bashing Obama. The culture wars are not over! And even if you try to stifle our free speech by imposing the so-called fairness doctrine on radio and Fox, we’ll fight you to the bitter end!
posted by Last Of The Moderate Gays on
As we have had 4 years of a bungling Bush I administration, 8 years of an unbelievably corrupt and hypocritical Clinton administration, and 8 years of an startlingly inept Bush II administration, you’ll forgive me if I don’t pop the cork to celebrate the prospect of 4 more years of yet another 2-party candidate folly. Until we can break the stranglehold of the two parties on this nation, it’s just going to be more of the same . . . Republicans kowtowing to their fundie masters, and Democrats dismissively giving us the crumbs from the table and trying to convince us that it’s a banquet. I’m just glad I finally decided not to vote for the lesser of two evils, and vote my conscience for a third-party candidate. THAT’S what makes me feel good about this election.
posted by Gene on
Fine, Pat. I have no problem with that. Those stats are one reason why I’ve supported the Libertarian candidate for President for the last several elections. I’m fortunate enough to have a pro-gay Republican congressperson, too, but not in CA. But I’ll be damned if I’m going to continue to fight for equal rights for groups of homophobic, religious, ethnic minorities. If the increase in AA/Hispanic turnout hadn’t happened this year, there’s a pretty good chance that Prop 8 would not have passed.
posted by Rick Rosendall on
One advantage that a blogger has over a losing candidate is that he doesn’t have to pause even for one day and wish the victor well. It is sad that Steve would anticipate Obama supporters being insufferable when it was his candidate’s crowd on election night that had people audibly booing mention of the other candidate. Speaking of which, McCain deserves praise for the graciousness and statesmanship of his concession speech. A true class act. If we had seen more of that guy during the past few months, he might be president-elect.
I agree with Steve about “reactionary social conservatism.” The early evidence suggests that the Republican Party will learn all the wrong lessons from its loss, and drift even further rightward. That would be bad not just for the party but for the country, which benefits from the counterweight of a credible opposition.
My happiness this week is tempered but not erased by the bad news from California and elsewhere on the ballot initiatives. I have been saying since the mid-90s that we have to stop expecting politicians to go much further than we have laid the political groundwork for them to go. The internecine warfare a year ago over ENDA, in which Barney Frank was lambasted as transphobic for noticing that the votes were not there for a trans-inclusive ENDA and for pursuing the best achievable bill, would cause me as a member of Congress to tell GLBT advocates on ENDA to come back to me after they get their act together. But for now, I am proud of my country for what we just did.
posted by Bobby on
“One advantage that a blogger has over a losing candidate is that he doesn’t have to pause even for one day and wish the victor well.”
—You know something, 99% of the media has been wishing Obama well. ABC’s Nightline only bothered to cover those happy by this so-called “historic” event.
The 48% of Americans who did not vote for Obama are sick of it! If McCain had won, there would be no talk of “follow the leader” and all that bullshit.
As Ann Coulter wrote:
“In the spirit of reaching across the aisle, we owe it to the Democrats to show their president the exact same kind of respect and loyalty that they have shown our recent Republican president.”
And that’s exactly what we’re gonna do. We’re gonna call him “Idiot in Chief,” we’re gonna say that he looks like a monkey just like you did with Bush, we’re gonna make horrible videos of him on youtube, ridicule him for the fact that he was congratulated by Iran’s dictator and Venezuela’s “president.” If you think we’re gonna give him any breaks, you don’t know who you’re dealing with.
Call it petty, call it karma, but every vile disgusting things your dailykoss and moveon friends did to Bush we’re gonna do to Obama. And if he tries to pass the fairness doctrine, or ban “hate” speech, or do any of the things liberals like to do whenever they face opposition, the attacks will get even nastier.
As the libs used to say during Bush, “he’s not my president.” Who knows, maybe we’ll have protests during the inauguration, why not, YOU DID IT! Now is our turn.
posted by jerry on
“They will be insufferable” Hmm…not as insufferable as the whining losers. I used to enjoy reading the Independent Gay Forum and am a long time fan of Mr. Bawer and reader of Andrew Sullivan. I have now given up on the Independent Gay Forum which is clearly not independent. The Independent Gay Forum should be retitled the Gay Anti-Democrat Forum. Lets not give the new president any chance to see what he is going to do. Lets attack him now before he has the opportunity to do anything. Disgusting. Good bye from a former reader.
posted by Bobby on
“not as insufferable as the whining losers.”
—Not too long ago, democrats where the whining losers. Seriously, can you remember anything before November 4?
“Lets not give the new president any chance to see what he is going to do.”
—Did your people gave Bush a chance? Nope.
“Lets attack him now before he has the opportunity to do anything.”
—Did your people ridicule Bush as a redneck and hillbilly before he got elected? Yes.
Welcome to the wonderful world of karma.
posted by Pat on
Did your people gave Bush a chance? Nope.
Bobby, as one who regards Bush as a top candidate for worst president ever, I did give Bush a fair chance after he was elected in 2000. I’m not crazy about Obama either, but I’ll give him a fair chance as well. But I get your point. What comes around goes around, or whatever that expression is.
posted by jerry on
Actually, as a gay man who has been a regular reader of Independent Gay Forum, and who is a fan of both Bruce Bawer’s and Andrew Sullivan’s writings, I am not sure who you mean as “your people”. The far left bothers me as much as the far right. After 9/11, President Bush had huge worldwide sympathy and support. He squandered all of that goodwill by his policies in the United States and around the world. Bush has never been a redneck or a hillbilly. He comes from an elite eastern family and was educated at an ivy league university. I believe him having reporters follow him around while he chops would and clears brush is a cynical attempt to seem “redneck” for public consumption. My problems with Bush are a result not of his background but of his actual failed policies.