Latest talking points AGAINST same-sex from the Obama Administration filed in court.

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

    Jun 16, 2009 3:32 AM GMT
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#31378698

    ... they are thinking Obama can't know about this...???...how can he not??? ... icon_eek.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 6:44 AM GMT
    The talking points she was reading at the beginning and the pic she showed was of the HRC president's open letter addressing the some of the points in the brief. Here is a link to the letter in it's entirety:

    http://www.hrcbackstory.org/2009/06/a-letter-to-the-president-from-joe-solmonese/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 7:00 AM GMT
    Oh well. Bought in, then sold out. Surpise? Not really.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 7:21 AM GMT
    Best case scenario is that Obama simply isn't overseeing his justice department and has not briefed them on his stance on this issue or mistakenly picked representatives that don't hold his views. Worst case scenario is Obama either believes in equal rights for gays only when it's politically expedient or doesn't care at all.

    Either way it's pretty fucked up.
  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Jun 16, 2009 7:32 AM GMT
    Senator Howard Dean:


    "The same kind of tension happened during the civil rights with African Americans... Martin Luther King pushing "if not now, when" and Lyndon Johnson saying that "Time is not right." It doesn't get done unless the community pushes harder than the community at large is willing to go. And that is the job of the leadership. And that is always the dymanic when people are struggling for rights under the law."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 7:38 AM GMT
    bsubioguy saidBest case scenario is that Obama simply isn't overseeing his justice department and has not briefed them on his stance on this issue or mistakenly picked representatives that don't hold his views. Worst case scenario is Obama either believes in equal rights for gays only when it's politically expedient or doesn't care at all.

    Either way it's pretty fucked up.


    Yeah, this is pretty much what I wanted to say! icon_razz.gif AGREED.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 7:48 AM GMT
    I thought what Howard Dean said was pretty good and I am not a Howard Dean fan. But, the time period he talked about with President Johnson was maybe six years. Gays have fought this fight against DOMA for 16 years or so? Not an exact equation, African Americans started the fight long before Kennedy and Johnson took office. But then again we started the fight long before Clinton and DOMA.

    I appreciated Dean's words though.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 9:38 AM GMT
    Dean's right. It was a lot too far.

    I can't believe I'm seeing and reading what I'm seeing and reading.

    Change? icon_confused.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 2:55 PM GMT
    Tapper saidDean's right. It was a lot too far.

    I can't believe I'm seeing and reading what I'm seeing and reading.

    Change? icon_confused.gif


    UGH....I have to stop following this, it just gives me agita! LOL

    I really wish we had courageous leaders who had real backbones. Right now, I'm sick of the whole lot of them. The Democrats are worthless spineless creeps and it permeates the entire party. And the Obama administration in simple 2-faced.
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Jun 16, 2009 2:59 PM GMT
    I'm not too surprised after my recent claims of disappointment on these matters. And now the White House is blocking requests for visitor lists since Jan. 20. Transparency is a front too!


    Red_Vespa, what do you say now?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 3:19 PM GMT
    I'm not sure Dean's comparison with President Johnson is valid or exonerates Obama on this or a number of other issues. Johnson was waiting for the right legislative moment to move forward successfully with the Civil Rights Act, but he was expressing strong vocal support for civil rights all along.

    Obama is not doing that with gay rights. On the contrary, these several recent Justice Department filings are in strong opposition to gay rights, not merely waiting silently on the sidelines, as Dean's words try to suggest.

    And if Obama had spoken in favor of gay rights since taking office, it wouldn't be necessary for him to have been personally briefed on those filings. His subordinates would have known not to have taken those positions in the first place. I don't buy the "lack of supervision" argument at all. Rather, it's a lack of leadership.

    The Obama Administration is now strongly advocating anti-gay policies. That is something Johnson never did against the Black civil rights movement, even if its leaders saw him as slow to act. And in the end, Johnson was its champion in Washington and is credited with getting civil rights legislation passed, at some political cost to himself and the Democrats. No, I think Dean's analogy fails.
  • swimbikerun

    Posts: 2835

    Jun 16, 2009 3:28 PM GMT
    This is not the Change I voted for.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 3:31 PM GMT
    swimbikerun saidThis is not the Change I voted for.


    EXACTLY!! I mean Obama did make it clear that he did not support Gay marriage, however he did say he supported rights and so forth.... WTF is happening?!?!?!?!?!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 3:33 PM GMT
    coolarmydude saidI'm not too surprised after my recent claims of disappointment on these matters. And now the White House is blocking requests for visitor lists since Jan. 20. Transparency is a front too!


    Red_Vespa, what do you say now?

    I say we're still better off than we would have been with McCain and Palin, and Republicans controlling Congress. We'd be fighting an anti-gay US Constitutional Amendment right now instead of just DOMA & DADT.

    But still I'm greatly disappointed, and not happy with the idea of subordinating my gay interests to other issues, like a kind of Log Cabin Democrat. Now I don't know who or what to support, but it certainly won't be Republicans, because they'd be much worse for us.

    Indeed, it's clear that Republican opposition to gay rights is what has Obama scared, afraid of the firestorm they'd create if he actively supported gays. So after their having pushed Obama in this direction, I would hardly look to the Republicans for our salvation.

    And I'm also disappointed in Washington Democrats in general, for not approaching the President to plead our case with him, as some have done to change the Administration's course on other matters like banking and regulation. Where are all our liberal friends when we need them? More like fair-weather friends when they want our votes.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 3:39 PM GMT
    Red_Vespa said
    coolarmydude saidI'm not too surprised after my recent claims of disappointment on these matters. And now the White House is blocking requests for visitor lists since Jan. 20. Transparency is a front too!


    Red_Vespa, what do you say now?

    I say we're still better off than we would have been with McCain and Palin, and Republicans controlling Congress. We'd be fighting an anti-gay US Constitutional Amendment right now instead of just DOMA & DADT.

    But still I'm greatly disappointed, and not happy with the idea of subordinating my gay interests to other issues, like a kind of Log Cabin Democrat. Now I don't know who or what to support, but it certainly won't be Republicans, because they'd be much worse for us.

    Indeed, it's clear that Republican opposition to gay rights is what has Obama scared, afraid of the firestorm they'd create if he actively supported gays. So after their having pushed Obama in this direction, I would hardly look to the Republicans for our salvation.

    And I'm also disappointed in Washington Democrats in general, for not approaching the President to plead our case with him, as some have done to change the Administration's course on other matters like banking and regulation. Where are all our liberal friends when we need them? More like fair-weather friends when they want our votes.


    I know, I feel adrift, abandoned by the Democratic party and unsure of where to turn. Reading the DOJ brief was like taking a punch to the gut.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 4:01 PM GMT
    Is this really surprising? He's a politician, and politicians will blatantly lie and manipulate to get what they want. He may have been all gung ho about being on our side when it meant he'd collect our votes. We do make up a large enough chunk of the population to make or break a presidential race afterall...If we knew concretely the way we do now that this administration was capable of spewing that vile filth there would've probably been a lot more voter apathy in the gay community. Don't forget he also has to appease his African American brethren who voted for him too, most of whom would rather see us all being squashed under the bus that Rosa Parks was on than have us seen as equals. The election's been won, and now they're showing their true colors. Shocker there! I think it's going to take getting the now younger generation into the white house before we see significant change. Obama's not old, but he's still from an era where being gay was something to be hidden and highly ashamed of.
  • Menergy_1

    Posts: 737

    Jun 16, 2009 4:21 PM GMT
    Red_Vespa saidBTW, in case you didn't see another thread about this, tonight (Tuesday, June 16), there's a PBS TV show dealing with DADT.

    It's on the Independent Lens program, and that's the name you should use to search local listings. The show itself is called "Don't Ask" and the times are 11 Eastern/10 Central & Pacific in most viewing areas, though a few are only airing an early morning repeat around 4 AM. Later rebroadcasts will also be carried by some stations over the next 7 days.

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/558554/


    Correction: The title of the show is "Ask Not" --
  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Jun 16, 2009 4:37 PM GMT
    Pushing Obama to do the right thing will make him a better President!

    Obama said that himself. He may not be President today if it was not for the pressure Hillary put on his campaign.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 4:49 PM GMT
    Here's a New York Times editorial on the DOJ brief:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/16/opinion/16tue1.html?ref=opinion

    A Bad Call on Gay Rights

    Published: June 15, 2009

    The Obama administration, which came to office promising to protect gay rights but so far has not done much, actually struck a blow for the other side last week. It submitted a disturbing brief in support of the Defense of Marriage Act, which is the law that protects the right of states to not recognize same-sex marriages and denies same-sex married couples federal benefits. The administration needs a new direction on gay rights.

    A gay couple married under California law is challenging the act in federal court. In its brief, the Justice Department argues that the couple lack legal standing to do so. It goes on to contend that even if they have standing, the case should be dismissed on the merits.

    The brief insists it is reasonable for states to favor heterosexual marriages because they are the “traditional and universally recognized form of marriage.” In arguing that other states do not have to recognize same-sex marriages under the Constitution’s “full faith and credit” clause, the Justice Department cites decades-old cases ruling that states do not have to recognize marriages between cousins or an uncle and a niece.

    These are comparisons that understandably rankle many gay people. In a letter to President Obama on Monday, Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights organization, said, “I cannot overstate the pain that we feel as human beings and as families when we read an argument, presented in federal court, implying that our own marriages have no more constitutional standing than incestuous ones.”

    The brief also maintains that the Defense of Marriage Act represents a “cautious policy of federal neutrality” — an odd assertion since the law clearly discriminates against gay couples. Under the act, same-sex married couples who pay their taxes are ineligible for the sort of federal benefits — such as Social Security survivors’ payments and joint tax returns — that heterosexual married couples receive.

    In the presidential campaign, President Obama declared that he would work to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act. Now, the administration appears to be defending it out of a sense of obligation to support a validly enacted Congressional law. There is a strong presumption that the Justice Department will defend federal laws, but it is not an inviolable rule.

    If the administration does feel compelled to defend the act, it should do so in a less hurtful way. It could have crafted its legal arguments in general terms, as a simple description of where it believes the law now stands. There was no need to resort to specious arguments and inflammatory language to impugn same-sex marriage as an institution.

    The best approach of all would have been to make clear, even as it defends the law in court, that it is fighting for gay rights. It should work to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell,” the law that bans gay men and lesbians in the military from being open about their sexuality. It should push hard for a federal law banning employment discrimination. It should also work to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act in Congress.

    The administration has had its hands full with the financial crisis, health care, Guantánamo Bay and other pressing matters. In times like these, issues like repealing the marriage act can seem like a distraction — or a political liability. But busy calendars and political expediency are no excuse for making one group of Americans wait any longer for equal rights.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 5:09 PM GMT
    I just called my congressman's Washington office and expressed my frustration with the Obama's administration and Democrats in general.

    I heard that my congressman has signed a letter to Obama urging more action on gay issues: gay marriage and issuing a stop-loss order from the president.

    I complimented my congressman on taking that action, but pointed out that I havent heard anything about this in the news. I pointed out that if my congressman's actions got more publicity others would be encouraged to follow. I contrasted the lack of publicity on this action with the publicity about my congressman's bill concerning erectile dysfunction ads. ... icon_rolleyes.gif

    I discussed that the Democrats have control of Congress and the WH, so there is no excuse not to be taking action on gay issues. I reiterated our frustration and pointed out that the margin of victory isnt that great but that if gays didnt vote Democratic it could change an election.

    And just called both my senators with the same message of our frustration.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 5:30 PM GMT
    Well, he has three years to correct the colossal fuck ups of the first six months.

    Feingold in 2012!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 11:32 PM GMT
    I just received an email from the Democratic candidate for Govenor of Virginia. His name is Deeds.

    He started his email with: "[Caslon]--

    Yesterday, President Obama sent out the following message to his supporters ..."

    That's all I had to read.

    Here is my reply.

    yeah, well, send this message back to Obama for me. Gays in Virginia might not be voting Democratic in this election. We are sick and tired of voting for Democrats and then getting nothing. Gays are just as much a voting constituency as Hispanics and women and we desire action on our issues, too. In these small margin of victory elections, the gay vote puts the Democratic candidate over the top. Maybe gays should sit out an election and let the Democratic candidate fail. The Virginia Gubernatorial elections would be a good one to sit out. Virginia can't much more against gays, so a Republican governor wouldn't be that harmful. Sorry Deeds, but we have to see some action!
  • styrgan

    Posts: 2017

    Jun 16, 2009 11:46 PM GMT
    I felt rather disheartened when I heard about this on Maddow last night. Dean also said that his feeling was that Obama was looking to accomplish more in the way of gay rights later on in his term.

    I am willing to give Obama this benefit of the doubt, but I am upset by the language in the brief. There's no need to bring up pedophilia and dog-fucking. Some undersecretary should resign for this.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2009 11:52 PM GMT
    styrgan said... but I am upset by the language in the brief.

    If his administration files this statement for this case, how can he say something different in another case or when Republicans throw it back at him and us? ... icon_evil.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 17, 2009 12:05 AM GMT
    He must know the contents; at least he must know now. There have been editorials in the major newspapers for several days.

    If you're pissed off, write a letter to Obama. A real one. Not the kind that circulates online and accumulates a string of names like so many barnacles.

    Send the kind of letter that takes staff time to open up and read.

    Send copies to sympathetic members of Congress. They don't have to be your reps. Sure, some summer intern will probably read it, but they've got to spend their time doing something anyway and they've got to report on their activity. Give them something to report.

    Complaining on an online forum isn't going to advance the cause much.