In addition to Jennifer Vanasco's column posted at left, "Obama's No Show," it's beginning to dawn on some activists (not those at the Democratic Party auxiliary known as the Human Rights Campaign, but to some others) that their president is a bit of a let down when it comes to being the promised "fierce advocate" for gay rights (excepting for the small matter of the right to marriage, which he upfront opposes as un-Christian).
Reports the New York Times, "President Obama was noticeably silent last month when the Iowa Supreme Court overturned the state's ban on same-sex marriage." And while the president has urged Congress to pass a dubious bill federalizing hate crimes against selected victims, he's delayed action on one of his key campaign promises that, like marriage, involves fundamental equality under the law: repealing the military's "don't ask, don;t tell" gay ban.
Last weekend, Richard Socarides, who advised President Bill Clinton on gay issues, published an opinion piece in the Washington Post headlined, "Where's our fierce advocate?"
It's about eggs and baskets, and what happens when you put all in one (HRC to Obama last year: here's our unconditional support plus our dollars and volunteer hours, given at the expense of fighting anti-gay state initiatives; we trust you'll be kind to us and invite us to your victory parties).
More. From Steve Clemons of the liberal New America Foundation, "Obama Needs to End Silence on Biggest Civil Rights Move of Our Time".
Furthermore. See Ross Douthat's New York Times op-ed column, "Faking Left." He writes:
the Obama administration does seem to have a plausible strategy for turning the "social issues" to liberalism's advantage. The outline is simple: Engage on abortion, and punt on gay rights.
The punting has been obvious. On the campaign trail, Obama promised to repeal the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy He still intends to - but not yet, not yet. He said he supported federal recognition for civil unions. His administration has ignored the issue. He backed repealing the Defense of Marriage Act. Don't expect that to come up for a vote any time soon.
With every passing day, it becomes clearer to those with eyes that so many professional LGBT leaders were and are merely Democratic party operatives, first and foremost.
Still more. From Andrew Sullivan, with whom I rarely agree, but perhaps he's beginning to see the light:
Here we are, in the summer of 2009, with gay servicemembers still being fired for the fact of their orientation. Here we are, with marriage rights spreading through the country and world and a president who cannot bring himself even to acknowledge these breakthroughs in civil rights, and having no plan in any distant future to do anything about it at a federal level. Here I am, facing a looming deadline to be forced to leave my American husband for good, and relocate abroad because the HIV travel and immigration ban remains in force and I have slowly run out of options (unlike most non-Americans with HIV who have no options at all).
And what is Obama doing about any of these things? What is he even intending at some point to do about these things? So far as I can read the administration, the answer is: nada. We're firing Arab linguists? So sorry. We won't recognize in any way a tiny minority of legally married couples in several states because they're, ugh, gay? We had no idea. There's a ban on HIV-positive tourists and immigrants? Really? Thanks for letting us know. Would you like to join Joe Solmonese and John Berry for cocktails? The inside of the White House is fabulous these days.
6 Comments for “Waiting for Obama…waiting…waiting…”
posted by sifrid on
I’m as disappointed that Obama hasn’t been more proactive on gay issues as the next person, but truthfully, I’m more worried about the economy at this point than same-sex marriage, which seems to be going forward at the state level (as it should be anyway) without his endorsement.
And besides, does anyone really think that Hillary Clinton would have been any better?
posted by Scott on
Hard to see the difference between Obama and McCain so far on gay issues. Sure it’s nice to talk about equal rights and ending DADT, etc. but at some point you actually need to DO SOMETHING about it and stop the weasel words. At least with a Republican we would know what we were up against. I’m sick and tired of Democrats pinning their hopes on a candidate, only to be stabbed in the back once the person takes office. Sorry guys, saying all the right things, talking about all your great plans at Washington cocktail parties, and meeting with ineffectual groups like HRC (that are more concerned about fundraising for their new multi-million dollar HQ) doesn’t get the job done. Let’s stop kidding ourselves, shall we? Change will come from the grass roots, not from any of these liars in Washington.
posted by Jorge on
I don’t know if I have a good sense of Obama, but I think Clinton would be a little better. I believe she would have a gay advisor in her campaign and would make efforts to placate the gay lobby. I believe she would have engaged our issues a little more in her first 100 days.
I don’t think she’s more for us politically than Obama, but I think she would be more responsive and that her actions would match her campaign promises a little more. She’s more honest.
posted by Richard J. Rosendall on
This message would be more credible coming from someone who has not been so hostile toward Obama. And Socarides is yet another Clinton hack from whom we heard no comparable complaints early in the Clinton administration–because, of course, he was a Clinton political appointee at the Department of Labor.
What on earth is so sacred about the first 100 days? I voted for Obama for President, not fairy godmother. And Steve, can you please drop the silly pose that everyone who disagrees with you is a subsidiary of HRC? That’s not true, any more than Obama gave us Prop 8 (since new voters actually broke against Prop 8). Let’s keep in mind that Obama inherited an awful lot of crap from his predecessor that he has to clean up. I for one never expected nor suggested that we could just sit back and let Obama do everything for us.
Oddly, the things I disagree with Obama on (his opposition to prosecutions for torture and his support for school vouchers) are things you probably agree with him on.
posted by Pat on
I’ve stated elsewhere that I’m somewhat disappointed that Obama hasn’t followed through on his campaign promises to propose ending DADT and have federally recognized civil unions, and for the Democrats in Congress to start the ball rolling themselves. But I’m patient, and I’ll give them more time. However, if the Republicans want to get the ball rolling now, that would be okay by me. But I don’t envision that happening. If and when a vote does come up for either, let’s see how the votes come up for each party. Because of what I expect how the votes will go is the reason why, right or wrong, HRC and other organizers continue to put almost all of their eggs in one basket.
posted by james on
So, what some of you are saying that this great president, this remarkable man, cannot handle the economy, the ‘war,’ what’s going on with the auto industry, AND simply say one word about DADT or gay marriage? Not one freakin’ word? Did any of you hear Gibbs’ response when he was asked about it at a press conference recently? he hemmed and hawed and looked simply ridiculous trying to stumble his way out of answering, saying that’s already been discussed previously, etc.
OK, we didn’t elect a fairy godmother, but could the President not say one word in support of gay marriage? And why has he not explained this back-tracking on DADT?
I’m not so familiar with everyone here that I know their backgrounds and motives. But I ddi not support Hillary (partially because of how her husband’s administration used and tossed aside the gays), I was originally for Edwards — but I threw my support behind Obama, argued loudly for him, lost a couple friendships with people who still hate him, cried tears of joy while watching the election night rally in Grant Park with my boyfriend of five years, and I have a bunch of “Obama Pride” and “Gays and Lesbians for Obama” and “Yes We Did” stickers that I’d love to send to the White House with a note saying, “We”re waiting, Mr. President, but We Won’t Wait Forever.”
And wouldn’t it be nice if this year’s “Pride” parades actually had a purpose, like calling attention to the president ignoring us and our concerns? But we know it won’t, they’ll just be big drunkfests, as always.