Obama’s Gay Promises

[Ian David]

In an effort to maintain homo support this general election season, Barack Obama today released an open letter to gay voters insisting that he’ll use his presidential powers to fight homophobic legislation. But, before the right wing runs away, Obama’s makes clear that our social evolution will take team work:

As your President, I will use the bully pulpit to urge states to treat samesex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws. I personally believe that civil unions represent the best way to secure that equal treatment.
…
Just as important, I have been listening to what all Americans have to say. I will never compromise on my commitment to equal rights for all LGBT Americans. But neither will I close my ears to the voices of those who still need to be convinced. That is the work we must do to move forward together. It is difficult. It is challenging. And it is necessary.

Americans are yearning for leadership that can empower us to reach for what we know is possible. I believe that we can achieve the goal of full equality for the millions of LGBT people in this country. To do that, we need leadership that can appeal to the best parts of the human spirit.

Yes, but that’s assuming the virulent anti-gay activists have any human spirit left.

Read the entire letter, after the jump…

More:
http://www.queerty.com/obamas-gay-promises-20080606/

[Captain Hilts]

1. He should ditch his association with homo-phobe Sam Nunn. nt

[babylonsister]

2. I'm not familiar with that association. Do you have a link? Thanks. nt

[terrya]

5. Apparently, Nunn is an advisor with the campaign.

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/politicalinsider/entries/2008/04/18/sam_nunn_lines_up_behind_barac.html

[babylonsister]

7. Thanks! nt

[terrya]

3. Yes, he should.

ZERO good is going to come of that.

I read stuff like this, and quite frankly, it doesn't get me to trust Obama completely on our issues.

[Captain Hilts]

6. And Nunn is now pitifully campaigning for the Veep spot, trying to recant his anti-gay policies. nt

[Chipper Chat]

8. SOMEBODY should brief Obama on Nunn's homophobia.

As I recall, in 1993 Clinton was open to signing an executive order to allow gays to serve openly until Sam Nunn barked at Bill "Would you want to be in a foxhole with a queer?" as if in the heat of battle with enemy missles streaming overhead the only thing on a gay guy's mind is getting into his buddy's pants. Laughable were it not such tragic stupidity.

[ccharles000]

92. I agree.

[Captain Hilts]

102. Nunn was lead Dem on the Senate Armed Services Cmte and PERSONALLY blocked the reform...

of military policy toward gays.

[Ian David]

120. But now Nunn says that decision should be "re-examined" or "re-evaluated." n/t

[Skittles]

141. Obama is well aware of Nunn's homophobia n/t

[Fearless]

4. For the sake of inteligent debate...

I have to ask, not necessarily yourself, but ask regardless... Perhaps he should ditch a few people, but would not supporting him and instead abstaining or voting for John McSame be preferable as any progress or even no progress at all (which doesn't seem likely, RE: DOMA and DADT) is better than going backwards?

[sandnsea]

10. He should ditch everybody with a mistaken thought

Get married before having babies? Ditched. Israel has a right to exist? Ditched. Palestinians have no claim in the ME? Ditched. Hamas is a legitimate political organization? Ditched. Reparations are a good idea? Ditched. Reparations are a bad idea? Ditched. Life begins at conception? Ditched. Life begins at birth? Ditched.

Seriously. This is absurd and has got to stop.

[terrya]

12. Sam Nunn is a nasty homophobe.

Senator Obama has promised to ditch the blantantly discriminatory "Don't Ask Don't Tell" which Nunn forced on Bill Clinton in 1993. DADT is bigotry, pure and simple. There is NO reason whatsoever why this disgusting policy should continue one year, one month, one week, one day, one hour longer. It needs to end NOW. And that is something a little more than a "mistaken thought" to me.

[sandnsea]

14. Obama already said he'll repealt DADT

He obviously can make up his own mind regardless of Sam Nunn. Don't concoct an issue where there is none.

[terrya]

15. Yes, MA'AM!

Well, thank you for instructing me what I should and shouldn't be concerned about. Gosh, I guess you know best, don't you?

[QC]

16. You know, one of my favorite things about DU is that there are so many helpful heterosexuals here

willing to instruct me in how to be a good little queer. It just makes me feel so, you know, secure. There's just something comforting about finding out that something I thought was important really wasn't at all and that I should never worry my pretty little head about it ever again. What would I do without all my advisers here?

[11 Bravo]

17. Damn, THAT is going to leave a mark! (As well it should!)

[sandnsea]

21. It'd take a hell of a lot more than that to leave a mark

believe me.

[terrya]

19. It's always nice.

I'm gay, but...DUHHHHHH....I can't think for myself! I need those instructive hetros to tell me what to do about that gay stuff! DUHHHHHHHH.

[sandnsea]

20. Hey, you go ahead and get all worked up over Sam Nunn

I'll continue supporting gay rights legislation at the state and federal level. We'll see whose efforts are more important in the long run.

[QC]

24. Thank you for giving me permission to choose what I care about!!!

I appreciate it ever so much!

:hi:

[sandnsea]

26. I'll remember to keep up with your ditch Sam Nunn campaign n/t

[QC]

28. And I'll check in from time to time to see how you're doing with Lon Mabon.

He should be enough to keep your very capable hands full.

[sandnsea]

32. Oregon has gay rights, does Fl? Oh yeah, no n/t

[QC]

38. And I am certain that the gays of Oregon are profoundly grateful to you

for singlehandedly giving them those rights. Good thing you were there for them, just like you're here for all of us at DU! :loveya:

[sandnsea]

39. Uh, I was, I am

which is why I know how stupid it is to get sidetracked with Sam Nunn, and in most states, gay marriage. Oh, and bathroom sex and Hillary's homophobes. Just because I tell you the truth, doesn't mean I hate you.

[newmajority]

88. Lon Mabon? Is that fucking asshole still around?

I would have thought Satan would have called him back down to Hell by now. What a vile, worthless excuse for a human being. Probably second only to Phelps in that category.

[Straight Shooter]

98. Just remember, you're not being thrown under the bus, merely shown to the back.

It's the same refrain every year, isn't it? It begins with the words, "Just be patient a little longer, because one of these days, you'll be a first class citizen."

[sandnsea]

101. Actually you're being invited "on" the bus

but you keep standing on the curb until half the passengers die.

[Straight Shooter]

122. Hello again.

Sweetness and light. :hi:

[genna]

133. What is the usual expression of being helpful? telling you concern is "heard"

[QC]

136. "Your concern is noted."

That snide, smug little remark tore through DU like typhoid through a 19th century tenement block! *ALL* the cool kiddies were saying it.

[sandnsea]

22. Mothers know best n/t

[dsc]

94. If Sam Nunn believed about blacks or women what he believes about gays

he wouldn't be mentioned on any list for VP. That is the problem.

[sandnsea]

103. Did Obama say he was on the list?

Not anywhere I heard. Sam Nunn is not going to be the VP, not in a million years. Hillary has a better shot than he does. This is just another chance to bash Obama.

[dsc]

105. would you accept any association between our candidate

and a person who believed about blacks what he believes about gays? As to the VP thing his name has been discussed repeatedly. I am hoping it isn't being floated.

[sandnsea]

107. Where have you been this primary?

Oh yeah, denying all the shockingly racist shit that has come out of the mouths of Dem leaders.

Did you hear about the Al Franken rape joke?

Yes, I know Nunn's name has been talked about in the media, but I've never seen someone in Obama's campaign mention his name.

[dsc]

110. nothing coming out of any dem leaders mouth approached what Nunn did

I didn't hear Franken's joke. We don't know who is saying Nunn's name I am hoping it isn't Obama's people.

[sandnsea]

112. David Brooks, for one

It's coming from pot stirrers. And I don't think much of anything could be worse than "shuck and jive" or a rape joke. BTW, he's also said he supports revisiting DADT and possibly repealing it.

[dsc]

116. How many service members were cashiered over shuck and jive?

I would be willing to bet 0. As to the rape joke I haven't heard it so can't comment. He shouldn't be our MN Senate nominee if he did tell a rape joke though.

[sandnsea]

118. I imagine plenty

I imagine if a black man were found to be "passing" before integration of the military, plenty were booted out. And I imagine as many women were sexually "harrassed" in the military as gay men have been. None of it should exist, but it does and lots of people get a pass on some really ugly behavior. If Nunn should be ditched, so should Ferraro, Sheehan, Kerrey, Cuomo, Rendell, and even the Clintons themselves. Did you read the article where one of her supporters admits top advisers discussed the racial strategy in PA?

[dsc]

132. words aren't actions

Nunn's actions, not words but actions, lead to the ruination of many gay and lesbian soldiers. Ferraro's words not so much.

[genna]

134. No, I had not heard Franken's 1985 rape joke

When I have to go to Fox News to get information, something is wrong with the substantive merit of the charge.

I don't think rape should ever be joked about, but it is Fox News.

Franken sucked for even thinking that was funny. Not 1985, 1995.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/06/06/frankens-senate-race-haunted-by-1995-rape-joke-on-snl-set/

In the 1995 New York magazine profile of “Saturday Night Live,” Franken is described among a group of show writers sounding out a spoof of Andy Rooney centered on a sedative pill bottle found in the “60 Minutes” essayist’s desk. Franken and fellow writers Norm MacDonald and Jim Downey kick around fictional Rooney responses to the discovery of the bottle.

The article quotes Franken putting an edgy twist on the discussion: “And ‘I give the pills to Lesley Stahl. Then when Lesley’s passed out, I take her to the closet and rape her.’ Or `That’s why you never see Lesley until February.’ Or, `When she passes out I put her in various positions and take pictures of her.”

MacDonald takes it a step further, suggesting that the Rooney rape comment be directed at other “60 Minutes” icons Mike Wallace and Ed Bradley. Franken chimes in: “What about `I drag Mike into my office and rape him. Right here! I guess that makes me bad.”‘

The skit never saw air after the final product got weak laughs in dress rehearsal, the magazine article said.

Nonetheless, Republican state Rep. Laura Brod said the quotes combined with the Playboy piece shows “a pattern of behavior which is not suitable for a U.S. senator.”

[ruggerson]

69. Why do you do this in every thread on this subject?

You're obsessed, lady.

[Betty88]

131. He shouldn't be considering VPs with records like this...

Voted YES on prohibiting same-sex marriage. (Sep 1996)
Voted NO on prohibiting job discrimination by sexual orientation. (Sep 1996)
Voted YES on Amendment to prohibit flag burning. (Dec 1995)
Voted NO on banning affirmative action hiring with federal funds. (Jul 1995)


http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Sam_Nunn.htm

Note: Jumptheshadow posting mistakenly under my partner's log-in on the laptop.

[woolldog]

13. Ahh, more guilt by association arguments....

[lildreamer316]

142. That's what politics is about. Are you suprised?

ALL politics is about 'guilt by association"; from the WH all the way down to the nightclub and the factory. It's not a wonderful thing, but that's half the battle, and where most of the intelligence of any candidate is proven..how deftly they can maneuver between the land mines of 'friends and associates'. It is a measure of a person's grasp of group psychology and dynamics, as well as the current mood of the MSM (whether they like it or not!). That's something worth paying attention to, at least for me. But I may be alone in this....

[newmajority]

49. I wouldn't entirely dismiss Obama consulting Nunn, in certain areas.

For example, if he wanted to discuss Georgia politics with him. (And Jimmy Carter & Max Cleland for that matter). But if pandering to bigotry is Nunn's idea of a strategy, I would expect Obama to tell him to go straight to Hell. And I absolutely do NOT want him as VP. I don't think a Dixiecrat Cold Warrior is a good advertisement for Change whether he's repented of his homophobia or not.

[w13rd0]

9. For those of you saying...

..."he has to ditch X or fire Z or denouce Y"

Have you ever considered the possibility of vigorously disagreeing with someone on some issues, but finding some agreement on others?

Do you really think Nunn is Obama's liason and advisor in regards to GLBT issues?

I think he's made his positions on these matters fairly clear.

[TechBear_Seattle]

11. So the African-American het calls for Jim Crow civil unions

I personally believe that civil unions represent the best way to secure that equal treatment.

Pity he never bothered to ask US what WE feel is best for ourselves.

I believe that we can achieve the goal of full equality for the millions of LGBT people in this country.

But separate is inherently unequal, Mr. Obama. If it is not marriage, it lacks nearly all of the rights of marriage at the state and federal level. Did Jim Crow help achieve the goal of full equality for millions of African-Americans in this country?

Americans are yearning for leadership that can empower us to reach for what we know is possible.

Yes we are, Mr. Obama. And with regards to marriage equality, it is clear we will continue to yearn for leadership for at least four more years. What a pity.

Edited for spelling and clarity.

[sandnsea]

18. Are you fighting the Jim Crow laws in Washington??

What a tragedy for gays and lesbians in your state.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2003675942_webdomestic21.html

[TechBear_Seattle]

30. I have tried, yes

Two years ago, our state Supreme Court ruled that marriage exists for the purpose of procreation. I pushed an initiative that would have put that ruling into law; that effort made international news. I have on good authority that Initiative 957 was mentioned during oral arguments before the California Supreme Court and played a part, however small, in influencing that decision.

I have also been told that, because I-957 so publicly underscored the idiocy of our Court's ruling, it was influential in gaining support in the Washington legislature to greatly expand the state's domestic partnership law (we went from seven of the 950+ statutory rights of marriage to 46.) In addition, I am still and will continue to lobby my two representatives and my senator to introduce a bill that will bring full marriage equality to Washington state. That bill, with luck, will be introduced in the next few years.

And here on DU and elsewhere, I fight to dispel the opiate smoke that has pacified many people into accepting the lies about civil unions and domestic partnerships resembling legal marriage in any way.

What have you been doing?

[sandnsea]

40. You're trying to repeal domestic partnership that just got passed?

lol. Oh okay, well good luck with that. :eyes:

[TechBear_Seattle]

71. Replace a cheap counterfeit with the real thing? Of course!

Why aren't you? Are satisfied in being a second class citizen undeserving of anything better? I'm not.

[Liberal Veteran]

80. I admire your stance, but believe it is woefully naive.

It's gonna take time to gain full equality. Sucks, but welcome to the real world. Our nation was founded by puritans and we still have trouble convincing people of scientific concepts like evolution because of the hold Judeo-Christian values has on our population.

It's gonna be piecemeal.

I'm not asking you to like it, but you don't turn down meatloaf and bread because you can't have a seven course meal every day.

[sandnsea]

87. Fighting "for" marriage isn't the same

as calling people who fight for civil unions and non-discrimination laws bigots.

[TechBear_Seattle]

91. With regards to civil unions, yes it is

People who fight for civil unions are fighting for Jim Crow. They are fighting for a legal standing that is inferior to the legal standing of heterosexual couples. They are fighting second class citizenship. How can that possibly not be called bigoted?

I'm not sure where "non-discrimination laws" came into the discussion. I am all for non-discrimination, which is why I am so opposed to separate and unequal conterfeit "marriage but we won't call it that."

[sandnsea]

95. Then we'll all stop fighting for civil unions

And you can fight for gay marriage by yourself.

Non-discrimination comes into it because when you finally get to the place of passing civil unions, the rest of the laws fall into place.

But I'll have no opinion on the subject from here on out and advise everyone I know that they have to support gay marriage or shut up.

[TechBear_Seattle]

96. If all of us fight for equal marriage, it will become a reality

Why should I have to fight alone?

And I belive very strongly that you are wrong. Jim Crow institutionalized discrimination, it did not fight it. Decades of Jim Crow did nothing to make "the rest of the laws fall into place." Why do you think that non-marriages will be any different? If you are unfamiliar with the concept of "Jim Crow," please read the Wikipedia article on Jim Crow laws.

[sandnsea]

100. Hey, go for it

We'll have to repeal a state Constitutional Amendment, even in Oregon - but you hold out for gay marriage. I'm putting my energy where it'll do some good.

And don't talk to people like they're idiots. Obviously I know what Jim Crow laws are.

[Ian David]

121. I firnd that "Ignored" usually doesn't contribute much to a debate. n/t

[QC]

139. I find that people who make a big song and dance of putting people on ignore

are generally too catty in that junior-high-mean-girl way to have much of interest to say about anything.

That rule of thumb has never steered me wrong.

[goletian]

33. RE: Pity he never bothered to ask US what WE feel is best for ourselves.

hes talking about what the best way to secure equal treatment is, not the ultimate goal of complete equality w/ word, "marriage." people have been demanding "gay marriage" for a while now, wheres it gotten us as a country? not very far. take the word, marriage, out of the equation, suddenly all the retarded homophobes drop their guard and give in to equality by a different name. then its just a matter of changing the name itself, which wont make any difference by that point, so itll be sure to follow.

hes not saying what you want is wrong, hes just saying the demand for all or nothing is the wrong approach. this country is only about half liberal. you gotta keep that in mind.

[TechBear_Seattle]

37. Would he have taken such an attitude regard black civil rights?

Would he have been so willing to support Jim Crow, simply because a demand for "all or nothing" was the wrong approach? Would he have cheered when a white politician said that anti-miscegenation laws were the best way to achieve full equality under the law?

I doubt that very much. I expect he would have been in the same position I am in: demanding that folks outside his community who claim to support his equal rights actually do so.

That is what I find so shameful about his attitude. He has been there; when he was born, his parents' marriage was illegal in 16 states. Why is it so difficult to say that separate is inherently unequal?

[ecstatic]

44. Do you realize that from the time of the Emancipation Proclamation,

over 100 years passed before the laws were even close to being fair? It didn't happen overnight, and the process is still ongoing. Change takes time. IT'S NOT FAIR, but that's just the way it is.

[TechBear_Seattle]

52. That was not the question

I know it took a long time for blacks to reach even the semblance of equal rights in this country. My question was: Would Obama have kept his mouth shut about racial inequities during that time? Would he have promoted Jim Crow as a step towards full equality? Or would he have kept prodding those who claimed to support full equal rights to NOT support Jim Crow?

Care to answer those questions?

[Liberal Veteran]

45. A rose by any other name. I don't care what they call it.

As long as it is the legal equivalent of marriage, they can call them domestic contracts, civil unions, or co-habitation arrangements.

Fucking ourselves over because we care more about a word than the actual rights is ludicrous.

[TechBear_Seattle]

68. The law DOES care

Our system of jurisprudence is very clear: if it is not A, then court precedence and questions of common law that deal with A do not apply. In other words, if it is "civil union" or "domestic partnership" rather than "marriage," then centuries of court precedence and questions of common law regarding marriage do not apply. That is hardly "a rose by any other name."

Then there is the matter of the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the US Constitution. If one state has "civil unions" and another has "domestic partnership," there is absolutely no requirement that these states recognize the institution of the other state as valid. If they are both called "marriage," then the US Constitution kicks in and a marriage in one state is valid in all states. Then there is the matter of almost a thousand federal statutes which touch on marriage. Federal law grants social security survivor benefits to a person's husband or wife; does that law include a person's domestic partner, or civil unioned partner? No; the existing law would have to be rewritten, which means Congress gets bogged down in rewriting and arguing over hundreds and hundreds of federal laws, some of which have stood for more than a hundred years (priviledges of being a spouse of a federal employee, for example.) And they would have to each be rewritten to include couples which might be in a domestic partner, civil union or some other type of non-marriage. Then turn your attention to the hundreds of non-statutory references to marriage, found in the rules, guidelines, policies, etc. of this country's vast bureaucracy. It would be much easier, and much cleaner and DEFINITELY much safer to simply call all of these things "marriage."

In law, semantics count. If it ain't marriage, then it ain't marriage.

[Liberal Veteran]

70. I'm sure that comes as a surprise to the married couples of Massachusetts.

Again. If we have a federal civil unions law that grants all the benefits of marriage, then the same rules apply with regards to full faith and credit.

[TechBear_Seattle]

76. Ask the DP couples in Washington and the CU couples in Vermont

And then ask all three groups about social security, federal income taxes, HUD loans and veteran benefits. Go ahead, I'll wait.

[Liberal Veteran]

84. Oh, sweetie. I don't HAVE to ask. I am one of those registered partnerships in Wa. State.

And I would like nothing better than to marry my partner of 18 years (and we are both veterans btw).

In case you weren't paying attention in the 90's, we got slapped backwards pretty damned hard wrt gay marriage.

Is it fair? Hell no! But are you gonna be happy if the backlash from pushing over a word results in a constitutional amendment outlawing gay marriage?

[TechBear_Seattle]

90. Ok, then, how about this?

I will be the first to admit that I am a firebrand on this issue; it is that important to me. I know quite well that change will not happen overnight, nor by the end of the next business day.

But if everyone becomes complacent, if everyone convinces themselves that "now is not the time," the the status quo becomes permanent. If no one is willing to keep the issue before politicians, if no one is willing to hold our leaders' feet to the fire and demand, "WHEN?" then the politicans will forget that it is something very important.

As another poster pointed out, it was a century between the Emancipation Proclamation and meaningful civil rights legislation for African Americans. If the black community had not demanded, "Equality NOW!," how long do you think it would have taken?

You don't have to support my actions. You don't have to particularly like my stand. But I will not let the matter of full equality die because, when that happens, hope for change dies too. I will continue to raise a ruckus and make demands because someone must. All I ask is, don't stand in my way.

[goletian]

117. thatd be a valid argument if obama didnt want gay unions with all the same rights as marriage...

but thats not the reality we live in right now.

[TechBear_Seattle]

123. Except that to get ALL the SAME rights as marriage requires marriage, not civil unions

If it is not called "marriage," then it cannot have access to centuries of US common law regarding marriage; therefore, it cannot have all of the same rights as marriage. That is just the way our system works, and nothing short of throwing away everything and starting over from scratch is going to change that.

[goletian]

130. it can have the same rights.

[AuntPatsy]

60. Your post makes perfect sense and i wish he could read it.

[goletian]

114. slavery, jim crow, civil rights. it didnt happen overnight, lol...

[TechBear_Seattle]

124. It would never have happened at all, if blacks treated civil rights the way gays treat civil rights

No matter how long civil rights for GLBT people might take, it will take much longer if we do not demand our so-called leaders to take action towards those civil rights. In the century between emancipation and the Civil Rights Act, do you think African Americans ever sat back and said, "Full civil rights will take a long time, so I will work to entrench Jim Crow and be happy with second class citizenship and inferior status under the law." Why the hell must we?

[goletian]

129. obamas pursuing equal rights for gays, all the same rights. hes just not focusing

on the word, marriage. thats it. if blacks could gain equality but not call themselves some special title, yeah, i think theyd go for it. at least in the meantime. at least... lol

[genna]

135. Let me stand in direct disagreement with that: As an AA if it is not equal I don't want it

Seattle has a point.

Don't make me drink from another foundation. And say it is just water.

Don't make me sit in the balcony. And say we both can see the show.

Don't tell me my daughter or son is not good enough to marry your daughter or son if they are so inclined. Because we can still marry someone else.


You do have to agree that the fierce urgency of now was just as relevant for the newly freed slaves, as the sanitation workers who had signs that said "Ain't I a Man?"


Life is too short to hear well, what would be best for you...argument.



I'm still reading commentaries after news articles that Obama is uppity. We haven't been able to move racism out of people's hearts. We have been able to enshrine a few legal protection on our status.

I wouldn't expect anyone to insist that I stop pushing. I'm trying to think of the most 'radical' elements in the AA community that the majority don't want to hear from EVER. Rev. Wright was radical for a number of people. Louis Farrakahn has said more offensive things than any other well known black people. People hate Al Sharpton's guts because they say he talks about race too much and pushes too many people's buttons. Just because people caricature the individuals doesn't mean them pushing their agenda is going to stop.



You've convinced me why civil unions aren't timely. Up until this debate, I thought hell is a b.s. compromise but conservative Christians will swing from the rafters if the government calls it marriage.

You've made a believer out of me.

[goletian]

138. a little off.

a better analogy would be drinking water from the same fountain, but calling it civil liquid for blacks, even though its the same damned thing from the same damned fountain. thats what obamas pursuing right now, civil rights with all the same rights n benefits. the word, marriage, is the main thing holding gay marriage back, ironically.

the demand for gay marriage, everything AND the word, is very healthy though. just dont hold obamas approach against him, because it seems to be the best approach. its very important for everyone who supports our constitution to advocate for gay marriage, but holding civil unions against obama isnt gonna accomplish anything.

[dsc]

97. that is just plain false

Among the states which specificly targetted civil unions and gay marriages are Ohio, VA, MI, PA, and NC. I know there are others but those are some which did.

[ecstatic]

42. Change is a process that takes time.

Or maybe you'd rather have McCain?

[TechBear_Seattle]

48. Don't even try to pull that bullcrap

I will vote for Obama; other than his cowardice regarding equal marriage, I have little complaint. But don't tell me to shut up about his failure on this issue, and don't you dare try to pull out the "Why do you want McCain to win?" bull shit.

[Liberal Veteran]

55. Idealism must be tempered with realism.

Hell. Washington isn't exactly the most conservative state in the union and it's been an uphill battle just to get a domestic partnership registry.

We would both like to wave a magic wand and make everything equitable, but we have to face the realism of anti-gay bigotry in our country.

[AuntPatsy]

74. I really don't agree, I think enough time has passed,thats a copout.

[SoonerPride]

50. He had a nationwide conference call this evening and YOU COULD HAVE TOLD HIM WHAT YOU WANTED

The national LGBT confernce call was open to all.

He indeed did ASK US WHAT WE WANTED.

You should retract your statement.

[libnnc]

56. Just for the sake of clarity here, Obama wasn't there himself

and they could not take live Q&A but they do plan on having a conference call with him there in the very near future (perhaps just a couple of weeks).

[ruggerson]

77. So what happened on the call?

[terrya]

79. No Q & A

Several people...including David Mixner, Elizabeth Birch, Joe Solomonese and Tobias Wolfe talked about Obama and his committment to the LGBT community. A bit of good news...Obama has come out in opposition to the California and Florida amendments on the ballot. Obama himself will apparently be on another LGBT conference call in a couple of weeks.

[libnnc]

89. Basically, lots of reps from LGBT orgs

(Joe Solmonese from HRC, Elizabeth Birch, and the Obama Campaign's LGBT spokespeople)

1. Give Clinton folks time to process what's happened. Birch had some great things to say about how much Clinton's campaign meant to her.

2. Organize, organize, organize. In all 50 states (not just the blue states). More to come on the details.

3. Reiterate that Obama "understands our needs and the fact that the Democratic party needs to earn our support." AND that the Obama camp understands the issue of trust among LGBT community. Also that Obama firmly rejects the CA initiative to ban gay marriage....That was basically it.

I wish there was a transcript or a recording of it. Maybe there is.

[TechBear_Seattle]

93. So basically...

It was all about how we GLBT had to give ourselves heart and soul to Obama while getting absolutely nothing in return except vague promises about "some day" and "when the time is right" and "someday but not today?"

[libnnc]

111. that's not what I got out of it

this was a preliminary "hey folks, this is who Obama is and we will be looking forward in the very near future to hearing what you think" meeting. I didn't expect anything more and I am personally relieved that it wasn't anything less. I am going to give the Obama campaign a chance because frankly, this is the only chance we have at the moment.

You know as well as I do that the ONLY candidate who sang our tune in our specific key was Dennis Kucinich.

Kucinich ain't what we ended up with. I'm ready to deal with that and to work for and with the Barack Obama campaign.

I (sadly) understand that many others here are not willing to do that--and I wish them the best and a hearty good luck in the future.

[Hippo_Tron]

127. As I said below, Kennedy was far from perfect on civil rights when he was running in 1960

But looking back at things it's obvious that civil rights advanced faster under Kennedy/Johnson than they would have under Nixon.

And it's not just about getting people elected. Once Obama is in office we need to constantly push him to support gay rights just as MLK was constantly pushing Kennedy and Johnson. Politicians by their nature will take the political safe ground unless they are pushed away from it.

BTW, Clinton and Obama's responses in the California marriage ruling are a sign of progress. Remember that just four years ago when Massachusetts' supreme court did the same thing, Kerry supported a state constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.

[dsc]

99. No you should retract yours

He wasn't on the phone and there was no Q and A.

[SoonerPride]

104. It was the opening part of a dialogue. This isn't a one-off instance.

It is a process and I appreciate that his campaign is indeed willing to listen to us and our concerns.

No one has been perfectly aligned with the LGBT community (except Kucinich) but his platform of repealing DOMA and DADT is right on.

[dsc]

106. that isn't what your post says

The call was accurately described and you left the impression the person was lying. Had you said in that post what you said now, I would be saying nothing.

[SoonerPride]

109. Well, to me, the campaign is making a sincere effort to connect with our community

I felt that the call was a good first step at engagement.

[TechBear_Seattle]

125. Bill Clinton made a seemingly sincere effort to connect with our community as well

What did that get us? The "Defense" of Marriage Act and Don't Ask/Don't Tell.

You will excuse me, I hope, for not weeping in gratitude.

[Warren DeMontague]

115. Unfortunately, the only candidate fully committed to Marriage equality was Dennis Kucinich.

You're absolutely right. Civil Unions don't go far enough. Full marriage equality should be the goal, with no equivocation or apologies.

[Hippo_Tron]

126. Kennedy didn't have wonderful positions on civil rights when he was running in 1960

But he was without a doubt better than Nixon on those issues.

Obama is dead wrong on gay marriage. But we have two choices in this election and one of them is without a doubt better on gay rights than the other.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[blogslut]

It's newb night at the old GD:P

Welcome all. ;)

[sniffa]

54. Don't you mean renewb?

:D

[blogslut]

58. yathink?

I never know anymore. If this were my board, I'd be looking for matching IP's in an attempt to find missing socks.

But, I just post here. :)

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[southernjockey]

43. Easy. I am in favor of civil unions

I just agree with Obama, Edwards, etc., that gay marriage is a bit too radical.

I don't see you trashing those here in the forum.

[terrya]

46. Well, whoop-de-do

We DESERVE marriage.

There is NO reason why we should have to settle for some "stay in the back of the bus" second class bullshit.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[libnnc]

59. You are a troll

FUCK OFF.

[terrya]

61. Stupid Terry took his time realizing that.

Ah, well.

Perhaps I might enjoy some pizza soon. :-)

[libnnc]

72. ooh ooh I get to use this image again

soon perhaps?

[terrya]

73. It's ready. Check the profile.

:-)

I suspect some more pizza might be served in this thread.

Thanks, mods!

[phrigndumass]

78. Served :)

[Liberal Veteran]

62. As a Christian, I believe marriage is between a man and many women.

If it was good enough for Solomon and Gideon, then it's good enough for me.

[newmajority]

83. Welcome to DU, Warren Jeffs!

I didn't realize they had the internet yet in the FLDS compound.

[phrigndumass]

75. Not all Christians agree with you

and your sad, homophobic viewpoint.

As a gay person, I believe Christianity should be available only to wise people. Guess that leaves you out.

[SoonerPride]

53. Separate is not equal, or didn't you hear the California Supere Court?

[libnnc]

29. You...

[TechBear_Seattle]

31. And instead should be giving concessions to moronic bigots? n/t

[ContinentalOp]

34. He should also be careful not to give blacks too many concessions

That could hurt him among "hard working" Americans huh?

[papapi]

35. How more ordinary can YOU get. I'm an exemplary American.....

and proud of it. Now can you say the same by apologizing?

[goletian]

36. those ordinary (stupid) americans youre talkin about

are the ones he has to fool into allowing equal unions across the board, with all marriage rights. once thats accomplished, the word, marriage, is practically a given.

[bicentennial_baby]

41. STFU, troll

[southernjockey]

47. Electorally speaking, most Americans oppose gays marrying legally

This is why Obama has been smart to oppose gay marriage. Take a look at this poll from 3 months ago:



http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=273

[Laughing Mirror]

137. March 2006 was "3 months ago" ...

You sure about that?

[clarkwesley]

63. I guess that would make Obama a troll as well

I'm with Obama too.

[terrya]

64. clarkwesley?

Jesus, you people aren't even trying, are you?

[clarkwesley]

67. Want me to tell you Wesley Clark position on gay marriage?

I would, but I don't want to upset you.

[phrigndumass]

81. It won't upset me, go ahead

But please add exactly how you feel as well.

[sandnsea]

82. No, you're with fuckwit n/t

[terrya]

66. We get some pizza!

Yay!

[newmajority]

51. Back so soon?

would you like extra cheese this time?

[clarkwesley]

65. John Edwards and John Kerry on gay marriage

"We both believe that marriage is between a man and a woman."

--2004.

[newmajority]

85. Funny, but my calendar says it's 2008

And neither Kerry or Edwards is running for President.

[phrigndumass]

86. Hope you enjoyed your stay

short as it was

[dorkulon]

108. He's got to get elected before he can help anyone.

We all know that civil unions are the generally acceptable middle-ground on this issue, and if Obama goes fully to bat on marriage, the GOP will beat him over the head with it every chance they get. I know many of you find this unsatisfying, but it's the difference between being viable and being Ralph Nader.

[muryan]

113. The title of the OP made me laugh

I'm not sure why, but I read it in a different way than was intended.

[ContinentalOp]

128. I did too! -nt-

[Duder]

119. Human Rights Campaign

Endorses Sen. Barack Obama for President of the United States
http://www.hrc.org/10571.htm

[galledgoblin]

140. link doesn't seem to be working (n/t)