Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Sullivan and Spaulding and Sudabay weigh in on Obama's HRC speech

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 12:53 AM
Original message
Sullivan and Spaulding and Sudabay weigh in on Obama's HRC speech
Edited on Sun Oct-11-09 12:54 AM by ruggerson
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/10/much-worse-than-i-expected.html

Andrew Sullivan

Much Worse Than I Expected

All I can say is: the president gave a speech he could have given at any point in the last three years. No one in that room could disagree with any of the things he said. I sure don't (with the exception of the hate crimes hooey). And he said it well and movingly. Like we didn't know he could do that.

But the point of electing a president who pledged to actually do things is to hold him to account, and to see if he is willing to take any risk of any kind to actually do something. I had a few prior tests of his seriousness or signs that he gets it, a few ways to judge if this speech had anything new or specific or clear. He failed every test.

To wit:

He says he will end Don't Ask Don't Tell but he has done nothing, and he offered no time-line, no deadline for action and no verifiable record that he has done anything, despite his claims that he has.

He says he is ending the HIV ban, but it is still in force, a year and a half after it was signed by George W. Bush and passed by massive majorities in both houses.

He says he favors equality for gay couples but said nothing tonight to support the initiatives in Maine or in Washngton State or the struggle in Washington DC for marriage equality. That's a test of real sincerity on this matter. He failed it.

He says he wants to end discrimination in employment even as he is firing more gay people solely for being gay than any other employer in the country - as commander-in-chief. And if an employer is firing gay people all the time, is it tolerable to accept as a response that he will stop doing it one day - but gives no time-line at all to hold him to?

Look: I didn't expect these issues to be front and center given his appalling inheritance; I know he has many other things on his plate; I didn't expect the moon; I didn't believe he would do any of this immediately; I understand that the real job is for us to do, not him, and that most of the action is in the states. And I remain a strong supporter of him in foreign policy and in the way he is clearly trying to move this country past the ideological divides of the recent past.


But the sad truth is: he is refusing to take any responsibility for his clear refusal to fulfill clear campaign pledges on the core matter of civil rights and has given no substantive, verifiable pledges or deadlines by which he can be held accountable. What that means, I'm afraid, is that this speech was highfalutin bullshit. There were no meaningful commitments within a time certain, not even a commitment to fulfilling them in his first term; just meaningless, feel-good commitments that we have no way of holding him to. Once the dust settles, ask yourself. What did he promise to achieve in the next year? Or two years? Or four years? The answer is: nothing.

HRC, of course, is putting no pressure on him; Joe Solmonese's disgraceful email actually took all pressure off him by saying he'd be happy to wait till 2017 for HRC to hold Obama accountable. HRC are putting pressure, as they always have, on gay people to go to the back of the line and be grateful a president attends their fundraising event. The only word for this is a racket. And if gay people do not rise up and demand change from this organization and stop funding a group whose goal has always been to sell the Democrats to gay people rather than secure civil rights, then they will continue to suffer the discrimination they live under day after day

Pam Spaulding

http://www.pamshouseblend.com/

I'm fresh off of SiriusOutQ's coverage of the HRC Dinner, and I have to tell you, the low expectations I had regarding LGBT policy were unfortunately met on that account. If you're an activist or citizen looking for timelines, actions, use of the bully pulpit, ANYTHING that would indicate to the community that our President was serious about moving on the laundry list of LGBT issues any time soon, you would call it a fail.

However, I have to agree with Sean Bugg, my fellow commentator on the coverage tonight, who made a great point that if you aren't a wonk or activist clued in to the messy politics going on behind the scenes, this speech is a huge home run of support from the President of the United States to a kid out in the sticks who watches it can now feel he is part of the American fabric. In our cynical view of the political system, jaded by the hypocrisy and spinning we see each day, as well as outright lying by pols and advocates, you have to remember how this speech can resonate with non-political LGBTs and straight America. The President actually engaged with a segment of our community in his first term to affirm support for the LGBT community. I doubt you'll see him endure sane, rational criticism from the right on this other than the usual whines from the fringes who already think he's Satan/Hitler/Muslim terrorist, etc. That's progress on its own and it should not be minimized.

So that's my praise. As far as criticism, I don't even know where to begin.

<snip>

What he said about DADT is no different than the message we've heard every time the admin is asked about this. Robert Gibbs winds the key in his back and belches that out regularly during press briefings. No news. DADT repeal is the big "gimme" that he could most easily accomplish -- all the polling support is there, there's bipartisan support on the Hill, and the face of the opposition is Elaine Donnelly, for god's sake? Many service members are already serving openly with their COs looking the other way. How many homophobic retired generals need to go to the hereafter before Nancy, Harry and Barry open the locked chest to find their dusty spines? I wasn't surprised that the response of Aubrey Sarvis, executive director, Servicemembers Legal Defense Network was diplomaticly muted.

<snip>

The President mentioned our relationships, but gave no timeline other than "You will see a time." Well crap, I can say that and be as precise as the President. Honestly marriage equality won't happen any time soon and isn't a priority - what about ENDA, which would free LGBTs from the shackles of silence of fear of losing employment. Does the President say he will use the bully pulpit to pressure Congress to act with deliberate speed. Nope.
This was a well-crafted, oddly familiar address if you're a political junkie, because it felt like a stump speech, a post-election speech and a WH LGBT photo op address patched together. I understand his support for equality; what I didn't hear is that civil rights of human beings are any more important than any other political issue he faces. That correcting a grievous wrong affecting the lives of American taxpayers he wants support from on other issues is ok to shuffle down in the pile of issues. Honestly, it's good to know where you stand -- statements of support without any timelines at this stage in the game is frustrating and very informative. But it doesn't mean we won't continue to press for them, no matter what Barney says.

And, did you notice the "T" invisibility in this address? No shock there either; I think this may be another education issue. I have to say the money quote from the speech that made me laugh out loud was the President running down a string of accomplishments and one he referred to was how he invited the homos to the Easter Egg Roll. Yep I can take that to the bank here in NC and do something with that bit of equality. BTW, the Bushes had gay families participate in those festivities as well, the first time they just didn't want them photographed with Laura. The second time seemed to be pretty irrelevant. Oy. Funny and sad, but it's progress, right.

Ironically, I give President Obama points for having the cojones to state that we are impatient -- and should be. He's man enough to say to continue the pressure, whereas the messages delivered by Joe Solmonese and Barney Frank in the past few days have been protective of the President and scolding of the grassroots and the LGBT Netroots. It's quite a stark disconnect that says more about our professional advocates than it does about the President.

An aside -- I think the major schism between our orgs and the grassroots and Netroots has reached a perfect storm with this weekend. The juxtaposition of this dinner, where we see a different view of progress, as ovation after ovation for the President suggested full support of the Patience Agenda, versus the people attending the march. Many of those marching on Sunday don't have the access to power or fat wallets to be considered for courtship by the Obama's 2012 team and the Dem party.

Joe Sudabay

http://gay.americablog.com/2009/10/obamas-big-gay-speech-heard-it-all.html

Heard it all before.

Posted by Joe Sudbay (DC) at 8:35 PM

Just watched the Obama speech at a party for the Maine campaign. He was quite proud of his Lady Gaga joke.

Obama told us, "I'm here with you in that fight." He told us that during the campaign, too. That's why we supported him.

The president acknowledged that many of us think progress hasn't come fast enough. But, he said we've made progress and will make more. He also wanted us to know that we're impacted by everything he does...health care, schools, etc....because we don't want to be identified by just one thing. But, "my commitment to you is unwavering."

When we look back we'll see a time when discrimination ended in the workplace and the battlefield. We'll also see a time when same-sex couples are recognized as equal. I guess we can look back on January 19, 2017.

Obama delivered a beautiful tribute to Judy and Dennis Shepard -- Judy and Dennis Shepard deserved the tribute. He let us know he's going to sign the Hate Crimes bill. Duh. We know that. In 2007, the Hate Crimes bill passed in the House and Senate (even breaking a filibuster in the Senate.) Bush threatened to veto it. Obama said he'd sign it.

Obama said we're pushing hard to pass an inclusive ENDA. And, he will support his nominees who are attacked because of their sexual orientation.

According to Obama, "we are moving ahead on 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.'" Obama said, "I will end Don't Ask, Don't Tell." But, there was no timeline. Nothing even approaching a timeline. No idea of how it will be done.

Obama talked a lot about same-sex couples, but never mentioned marriage or even civil unions. Although, he did tell us he wants Congress to repeal DOMA.

He mentioned AIDS in DC, but didn't mention marriage in the District. No mention of the battles in Maine or Washington State.

This speech offered less than the cocktail party speech for the A-listers back in June.

The expectations were very high. The president spoke for approximately 25 minutes. And, tonight, he did not deliver anything new or exciting. He did not assuage our concerns.

I'm sure HRC is happy. This was a big night for the institution. But, I'm not sure what it did for the movement -- or HRC's actual mission of full equality.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Behind the Aegis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 01:00 AM
Response to Original message
1. Pretty much sums it up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ruggerson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. Yep
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. You know, Sully used to be Obama's #1 fanboi.
What happened?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MarjorieG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 01:33 AM
Response to Original message
2. Any social issue would bring easy media/GOP distraction from health care, climate change for ALL,
and any LGBT legislation needs to come from Congress to withstand time. Military has asked that Obama not decree an end to DADT, which would also lessen Congressional urgency. My concern and the community's is fewer Dems come 2010, especially electronic close elections, which and I'm sure underlies panic and impatience. I think Obama must get that as well.

We've come a long way from when GWB wanted to declare a people and group unconstitutional, but we must keep on Congress. Obama multi tasks, but not sure about them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kayla_GoObama Donating Member (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 01:40 AM
Response to Original message
3. My point exactly
I love this website!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 01:46 AM
Response to Original message
4. Exactly right. He finally made committments to be our ally but...
there were no specifics, no time-lines, no concrete actions. It is still just words, but for the first time it sounds like he might be looking to actually do something.

Hopefully this time he will actually deliver something that advances our civil rights and makes him a real ally. Hopefully, now that we have pretty words, we'll get some results to follow.

The progress here is that he isn't hemming and hawing and hedging his bet with the fundamentalists, trying not to offend them while making suggested, not-really-stated promises to us.

I give him credit for finally giving a speech that states unequivocally that he wants to be our ally and he wants to help us. I really hope that soon we will all be able to give him credit for having accomplished something real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
6. I wonder how this will affect Sully's status as DU hero? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OmmmSweetOmmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-11-09 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
8. Andrew Sullivan mentioned something near to himself. He's HIV postitive, and can't become a citizen
because of that.

Also, as to ending DOMA. Why is the Department of Justice still fighting lawsuits that are claiming that DOMA is Unconstitutional?

http://www.sovo.com/2009/9-25/news/national/10653.cfm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 03:52 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC