Log Cabin Republicans achieve what Obama and Congress could not or would not achieve

[Newsjock]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/10/12/state/n122909D02.DTL&tsp=1

... U.S. District Court Judge Virginia Phillips' landmark ruling was widely cheered by gay rights organizations that credited her with getting accomplished what President Obama and Washington politics could not.

... the Log Cabin Republicans, the gay rights group that filed the lawsuit in 2004 to stop the ban's enforcement.

It's easy (and popular) to dismiss the Log Cabin Republicans as hypocrites or worse, but the bottom line is that they have achieved a significant victory here, and for that they should be thanked.

And we all talk about what "the Republicans" would do to gay rights if they got back in power. There might be truth in that fear, but today we saw a GOP-focused gay group's six-year effort pay off while the congressional Democrats (and, since 2009, President Obama) mostly kept their powder dry through inaction or snail's-pace maneuvering.

In an era where every Democratic voter is important, Log Cabin's message and actions might resonate with just enough gay and supportive voters to make a difference for the Republicans. The Democrats ignore this risk at their peril.

[Pirate Smile]

1. Civil Rights issues are often easier and quicker to deal with in the courts then in the political

branches like Congress & the Presidency. That is nothing new and the reason is obvious - the bigotry of the voting public.

How long would it have taken Congress & a President to do what the Supreme Court did in Brown vs. Board of Education?

This is why Conservatives hate the courts so much.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[xchrom]

3. That I hate log cabin ass hats is one thing --

That somewhere in their little warped souls is a desire
For equality is another.

[EFerrari]

5. Yep. n/t

[leftstreet]

6. +1

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

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

[Tarheel_Dem]

7. Question is...what were they doing during the last administration?

:shrug:

[leftstreet]

8. Probably being told to stop whining, and get drug tested n/t

[leftstreet]

9. dupe

[superduperfarleft]

10. Why does it matter? n/t

[Tarheel_Dem]

26. I had the same question. But some seemed intent on comparing and...

contrasting the actions of the president with those of the Log Cabin REPUBLICANS! Some of the same people who were pissed at the president's efforts to work across the aisle, are now rushing to embrace the other side, because of a "single issue"? You don't find that a bit hypocritical? :shrug:

[FreeState]

11. This case started in 2004 - Bush was President then was he not? n/t

Link: http://www.logcabin.org/logcabin/press_101204.html

[ProSense]

12. I don't think that's the question. They're not elected officials.

The question is where were those on the left who have been complaining about this injustice all along?

Why did it take Republicans to file this law suit? DADT has been the law for more than 17 years.

[Tarheel_Dem]

14. They were too busy kissing Clinton's ass. If there had been this kind of

uproar at the time, is it possible that neither DOMA nor DADT would exist today? It never ceases to amaze me how this president is supposed to right all of America's wrongs in 18 months.

[Renew Deal]

16. DADT was considered a major step forward in 1993.

To me it seemed discriminatory, but I guess we weren't ready for such dramatic "change" back then.

[dsc]

24. then maybe he shouldn't have made the promise

Obama, not the left blogosphere, and not his gay critics, promised a repeal by the end of this year and he didn't deliver. He made the promise to get our money and our votes, which he did get. We did our part, he didn't do his.

[dsc]

23. the suit dates from 2004

that might give you a clue.

[Tx4obama]

13. Obama and Congress have NOT been ignoring this issue.

The PERMANENT repeal of DADT is in the Defense Appropriations bill which the democrats tried to get a vote on a couple of weeks ago. Congress will have it on the agenda again and WILL vote before the end of the year.
I am really tired of folks that say that Obama and Congress aren't doing anything.
Obama and Congress ARE working on this issue in a way that will be PERMANENT - why can't people see that fact!

[Renew Deal]

15. Maybe you're right. How many DUers will now vote for the republicans?

[David Zephyr]

17. Well, 41 years after Stonewall, gay Republicans did something. And it was good.

But, as a gay activist since 1970 when I was a teenager here in Los Angels, no group has ever had lower standing in my eyes than homosexuals who were Republican, who voted Republican, who donated to Republicans and who mocked our out and proud fellow GLBT Americans.

This victory was not a Log Cabin Republican victory.

This victory could have never happened without all the progress made by brave GLBT Americans, the vast majority of whom have been Democrats and who sacrificed and sacrificed to change the culture, to press for equality.

And I still have no place in my heart for the Log Cabin Republicans.

This "victory" did not happen in a vacuum.

I applaud the plaintiffs, the attorneys, the judge and our GLBT community and our GLBT service women and men in the Armed Forces.

[msanthrope]

18. They only sued on behalf of their membership. So only they benefit. Typical.

(I'm pretty certain the associational standing ruling is going to get overturned.)

[mdmc]

19. props to the log cabins..

[stray cat]

20. SO what have you done lately?

[Greyhound]

21. I think would not is clearly the proper term. n/t

:kick: & R

[ZombieHorde]

22. A broken clock is right twice a day. nt

[ruggerson]

25. There seem to be some here who want equality for gay people

only if Obama is given sole credit for it and only if it happens on his timetable.

Interesting set of priorities.

[mkultra]

27. i fail to be shocked that

a group dedicated to gay rights brought and won a case. The real question is, why did a group of gay republicans beat every group of gay progressives to the table?