Obama could quell growing accusations of "no passion, no heart" with gay rights speech

[Bluebear]

There has been a growing roar within the gay community about seeming inaction by a man who promised change.

Some activists fume that President Obama hasn’t followed through on his promise to repeal the offensive Defense of Marriage Act or muttered a substantive word about the legalization of same-sex marriage in six states. After last night's airing of NBC's Inside the Obama White House interview, in which Obama provided a tepid answer to a question about whether “gay and lesbian couples who wish to marry in this country have a friend in the White House,” the blogosphere is filling with cries of “shameful” and “no passion, no heart, no real connection to our cause.”

Others are enraged by Obama’s failure to end the ban on gays serving openly in the military. In his “Hypocrisy Watch” segment yesterday, MSNBC's David Shuster derided Obama, saying "Here we are, more than four months into your administration and the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy remains in place." ...

Still, Obama should be doing more to quell the rebellion. He has proclaimed June 2009 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month. But to make that declaration more than a token gestures, what he needs to do is deliver an address on gay rights akin to his landmark speeches on the Middle East, national security, abortion and race. Stating clearly that gays and lesbians should and will be able to claim full title to the American Dream, and all its promise, could go a long way.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2009/06/okay_obama_now_lets_have_a_spe.html

[SemiCharmedQuark]

1. This is an excellent article.

K&R

[dorkulon]

2. Great, another speech.

Obama gives moving speeches, but eventually we're going to need to see some action--not just on this issue, but many. I don't want to be three years in and hearing another great speech about how we need to do what he already should have done.

[Bluebear]

3. It at least would confirm to us that he knows that we're out here!

As of now, it's hard to tell.

[MannyGoldstein]

4. Face It:The GLBT Community Won't Vote Republican

If it won't win extra votes or cash, nothing substantive will be done.

That is the way of the Clinton, and Obama has surrounded himself with Clintonites.

[Bluebear]

5. But we might start staying home

Thinking it won't matter. What a shame that would be.

[MannyGoldstein]

6. When Faced With The Reality Of A Republican President

Then many will head to the polls.

This Clinton triangulation bullshit is so incredibly destructive to our country. It can only fail when a strong third party shows up on the left.

[mitchtv]

7. I will stay home, or write in

I'm too old to be afraid of the pukes. I have been a union man/dem since the 60's . I've paid my dues. The Dems can support my rights or I will write in someone who will. That goes for the whole ticket, no more waiting.

[MannyGoldstein]

12. But The Republicans Won't Support GLBT Rights Either

And if they do, the "Democrats" will suddenly embrace GLBT rights also.

So most will hold their nose and vote Democratic. This is the horror of triangulation - by staying one millimeter to the left of the Republicans at all times, they'll always get the vote of the left and much of the middle. There is nobody to push for actual Democratic values.

[LostinVA]

15. I'm not going to let any of them get away with it any more

Soem things need to happen the next year or two.

[Toasterlad]

9. Why?

We survived eight years of George Bush, and things didn't get any worse for us. They just didn't get better. We elected Obama because he promised things would get better. Clearly, he was lying. So why should we care if another Republican gets in?

The rest of you better wake up and start voting for progressive candidates, or you're going to have a Romney or Palin on your hands for the next 50 years...if the world lives that long.

[LostinVA]

14. I won't, I'll stay home -- and I've vote in every election I can since I turned 18

[ShadowLiberal]

10. Actually there have been cases of similar kinds of party switches

While only 25% of GLBT vote republican, there actually are times in history in which hated minority groups have switched to support the party that once fought much more fiercely to suppress their rights, just look at the African American vote.

The GOP was the party of Lincoln, wherever blacks could vote they tended to be republicans, while the white southerners (who were the only ones who could vote there) stuck with the democrats, then the party of racists. Eventually the GOP lost the black vote, quite badly, with the big turning point coming from the 1964 civil rights act signed by democratic president Lyndon Johnson. It didn't matter that 2/3's of the votes to pass it were GOP votes.

Of course it wouldn't be easy for the GOP to gain the gay vote, not so soon after 2004 when they basically dragged gays through mud and used them to scare their base and get them out to vote. For such a shift to happen the GOP would have to make a serious play for the GLBT vote, and probably the straight people who strongly support gay equality as well. Given the current GOP however, I don't see them making a serious attempt at winning the gay vote.

[graywarrior]

8. He really needs to take a stand on this and NOW.

[armyowalgreens]

11. Sounds like a self-destructive idea.

All " true progressives" are getting screwed here. I want the wars over now. I want single payer now. I want gay rights and all civil rights now.

But I'm not about to allow elections to be handed over to the enemy because my own party is lagging severely behind. That's counter-productive.

[mitchtv]

13. I took the pledge

You either support marriage equality , or No Gay Vote and $upport. Self destructive is voting for Dems who will stab you in the back- no exceptions to the Pledge

[LostinVA]

17. +1

[armyowalgreens]

18. Okay, so what would you think

if a large enough amount of people were like you and didn't vote and then the republicans won. How would you feel then?

Sometimes it's better to vote for someone who will at least not take more rights away from you.

An absolutely uncompromising attitude and unwillingness to deal with the nasty situation at hand will eventually screw you over.

[konnichi wa]

16. He seems to have plenty time to go out for burgers...is it too much to hope for a 5 minute comment

on how he is at least THINKING about it? (assuming he is, anyway...)

:eyes: