Obama and Senate Democrats Throw Gays Under the Bus on Immigration Equal Rights

  • Suetonius

    Posts: 1842

    May 22, 2013 4:02 PM GMT
    Despite recent lip service in support of gay rights, Feinstein's true colors emerge (with Shumer, Durbin, Frankin and Leahey), as she voteed for immigration bill not containing a provision giving gay citizens equal rights in immigration. They all care much more about granting rights to illegal immigrants than giving equal rights to legal gay citizens. Not that this should come as any surprise to anyone who has followed gay rights issues, as it was predicted long ago. How many gays were naive enough to donate money to their campaigns (or to the other democrats who voted for this bill after the gay rights amendment had been dropped)?
    http://www.washingtonblade.com/2013/05/21/breaking-leahy-withholds-amendments-for-gay-couples-in-immigration-bill/
    Obama lobbied against the gay rights provision, so no surprise there (The" we can't get everything we want" routine; and he has reversed his announced platform on gay rights a number of times in his short career.) live in San Francisco, and I can still remember Feinstein's anti-gay stance when she was a county supervisor. Seems her convenient conversion to belief in equal rights for gays may not have been total. The sum of my reaction is disgust with all of them - these supposed liberals.
  • tazzari

    Posts: 2938

    May 22, 2013 6:09 PM GMT
    Is it a betrayal or realpolitik? The GOP had made clear that any bill with GLBT couples included would fail. That's the reality we face with the right wing, which is out of touch with America (see http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/3205975)

    See today's Advocate with more. (http://www.advocate.com/politics/2013/05/22/sen-chuck-schumer-tries-explaining-immigration-i-know-provides-little-comfort)

    Perhaps the Administration should have called their bluff. I wish they had. But this is part and parcel with the GOP's tactic of simply blocking everything, whether by filibuster or threat.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 22, 2013 9:34 PM GMT
    Barney Frank Supports Immigration Bill Without LGBT Protections

    http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/barney-frank-supports-immigration-bill-without-lgbt-protections/news/2013/05/22/67362

    “The choice we have is not between an Immigration Bill which helps same-sex couples and one that doesn’t,” Congressman Frank said in a statement, “but a choice between an Immigration Bill that does not include same-sex couples or no bill at all. Opting for no bill at all–which would have been the result if Sen. Leahy offered his amendment–would not help LGBT couples, but it would deprive millions of people of needed help.”


    “Unfortunately, while Congressional Democrats are ready to provide this aid for same-sex couples, the overwhelming opposition from the Republican members to our rights means that a bill protecting them has no chance of beating a Senate filibuster, or passing the right-wing dominated House,” Frank added. “Given that reality, the morally and politically appropriate course is to help adopt a good Immigration Bill, and continue our fight for marriage rights on a parallel path,” Congressman Frank concluded.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 23, 2013 2:51 PM GMT
    http://techcrunch.com/2013/05/23/a-hypocritical-silence-on-gay-immigrants-rights/

    Indeed, the temptation to compromise on civil rights progress is not new to the United States. In the 19th century, abolitionist and feminist leaders erupted in vicious internal struggles over whether black abolitionists should also support female equality at the risk of their own causes. Eventually, black rights hero Frederick Douglass was persuaded by icononic feminist, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, that we should not choose between the rights of groups for political expediency.

    “I have never yet been able to find one consideration, one argument, or suggestion in favor of man’s right to participate in civil government which did not equally apply to the right of woman,” Douglass said, after years of debate.

    The 21st century civil rights struggles face the same dilemma. If supporters claim to the be on the “right side of history”, then we should recognize that well-intentioned piecemeal civil rights for political expediency has historically been the most biting form of bigotry.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 23, 2013 2:54 PM GMT
    tazzari saidIs it a betrayal or realpolitik? The GOP had made clear that any bill with GLBT couples included would fail. That's the reality we face with the right wing, which is out of touch with America (see http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/3205975)

    See today's Advocate with more. (http://www.advocate.com/politics/2013/05/22/sen-chuck-schumer-tries-explaining-immigration-i-know-provides-little-comfort)

    Perhaps the Administration should have called their bluff. I wish they had. But this is part and parcel with the GOP's tactic of simply blocking everything, whether by filibuster or threat.


    Well said.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 23, 2013 3:38 PM GMT
    I'm torn on how to feel about this. Philosophically and ideologically, denying few equality to further the rights of others is deplorable. If the senators had any true sense of liberty they would not have backed down. On the other hand, if DOMA is found to be unconstitutional in the pending SCOTUS case, then the issue is mute as it would be illegal for the federal government to make distinctions between couples.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 23, 2013 3:41 PM GMT
    struggling to care.......

    well i do care about the immigrants i guess
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 23, 2013 4:22 PM GMT
    It's what the Republicans wanted, not the Democrats. Don't assume too much, OP. The left knows what it's doing. Give the right enough rope without the excuses necessary to block passage of a bill, and they'll hang themselves in a big and beautiful way. icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 23, 2013 4:25 PM GMT
    tazzari saidIs it a betrayal or realpolitik? The GOP had made clear that any bill with GLBT couples included would fail. That's the reality we face with the right wing, which is out of touch with America (see http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/3205975)

    See today's Advocate with more. (http://www.advocate.com/politics/2013/05/22/sen-chuck-schumer-tries-explaining-immigration-i-know-provides-little-comfort)

    Perhaps the Administration should have called their bluff. I wish they had. But this is part and parcel with the GOP's tactic of simply blocking everything, whether by filibuster or threat.


    Immigration reform passed by 13-5. No one was paying attention thanks to the disaster in Oklahoma so democrats could have passed anything they wanted. Just like the Insider Trading repeal during the Boston Marathon bombings.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 23, 2013 4:28 PM GMT
    Animus said
    tazzari saidIs it a betrayal or realpolitik? The GOP had made clear that any bill with GLBT couples included would fail. That's the reality we face with the right wing, which is out of touch with America (see http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/3205975)

    See today's Advocate with more. (http://www.advocate.com/politics/2013/05/22/sen-chuck-schumer-tries-explaining-immigration-i-know-provides-little-comfort)

    Perhaps the Administration should have called their bluff. I wish they had. But this is part and parcel with the GOP's tactic of simply blocking everything, whether by filibuster or threat.


    Immigration reform passed by 13-5. No one was paying attention thanks to the disaster in Oklahoma so democrats could have passed anything they wanted. Just like the Insider Trading repeal during the Boston Marathon bombings.


    Oh, lord. You cannot be serious.
  • BIG_N_TALL

    Posts: 2190

    May 23, 2013 4:46 PM GMT
    This is surprising....... not...... icon_neutral.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 23, 2013 4:52 PM GMT
    Suetonius saidDespite recent lip service in support of gay rights, Feinstein's true colors emerge (with Shumer, Durbin, Frankin and Leahey), as she voteed for immigration bill not containing a provision giving gay citizens equal rights in immigration. They all care much more about granting rights to illegal immigrants than giving equal rights to legal gay citizens. Not that this should come as any surprise to anyone who has followed gay rights issues, as it was predicted long ago. How many gays were naive enough to donate money to their campaigns (or to the other democrats who voted for this bill after the gay rights amendment had been dropped)?
    http://www.washingtonblade.com/2013/05/21/breaking-leahy-withholds-amendments-for-gay-couples-in-immigration-bill/
    Obama lobbied against the gay rights provision, so no surprise there (The" we can't get everything we want" routine; and he has reversed his announced platform on gay rights a number of times in his short career.) live in San Francisco, and I can still remember Feinstein's anti-gay stance when she was a county supervisor. Seems her convenient conversion to belief in equal rights for gays may not have been total. The sum of my reaction is disgust with all of them - these supposed liberals.


    With Feinstein and her whole democrat crew voting to ban any law suits against Monsanto for Genetic modified food and Obama bailing out Wall Street while middle class peeps were losing their homes it is clear that in 2013

    .............., DEMOCRATS ARE THE NEW REPUBLICANS . ..............,,,.,,,....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 23, 2013 4:59 PM GMT
    credo said
    Animus said
    tazzari saidIs it a betrayal or realpolitik? The GOP had made clear that any bill with GLBT couples included would fail. That's the reality we face with the right wing, which is out of touch with America (see http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/3205975)

    See today's Advocate with more. (http://www.advocate.com/politics/2013/05/22/sen-chuck-schumer-tries-explaining-immigration-i-know-provides-little-comfort)

    Perhaps the Administration should have called their bluff. I wish they had. But this is part and parcel with the GOP's tactic of simply blocking everything, whether by filibuster or threat.


    Immigration reform passed by 13-5. No one was paying attention thanks to the disaster in Oklahoma so democrats could have passed anything they wanted. Just like the Insider Trading repeal during the Boston Marathon bombings.


    Oh, lord. You cannot be serious.


    As they say, never let a good tragedy go to waste.
  • metta

    Posts: 39166

    May 23, 2013 5:33 PM GMT
    Gays Thrown Under Immigration Bill Bus?




    http://live.huffingtonpost.com/#r/segment/lgbt-community-to-sit/519cec0b02a76071150000b5
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 23, 2013 5:38 PM GMT
    I got an email from Patrick Leahy saying it was his amendment that would have added LGBT's to the bill; need to check into this.
  • e2ksj3355

    Posts: 110

    May 23, 2013 6:14 PM GMT
    I hate that the Dems caved on this, but I think it was a smart move politically to keep it alive. I think most are counting on DOMA to be struck down and Fed benefits (including one's for immigration) will have to be offered to same-sex married couples.