iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Alan Cumming: Obama Has Done 'Diddly Squat' For Gay Rights

First Posted: 10/24/10 04:34 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:05 PM ET

Alan Cumming
Alan Cumming

Actor and Obama supporter Alan Cumming sharply criticized the president this week for seeking to stay a judge's decision to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

"We keep hearing tht Obama is an ally, that DADT will end under his watch," Cumming wrote on his blog, "but what do we actually get? Diddly squat thus far on a federal level and in addition to that some very offensive statements that would have made the Republicans look bad."

"In a time when America is full of hatred of all kinds, but especially hatred towards young gay people, what message is the president sending when he repeatedly goes out of his way to spread the message that the gay population is not worthy of the respect that everyone else is?!"

Cumming isn't the only supporter of gay rights who is angry with Obama. If Democratic candidates are counting on long-standing support from gay voters to help stave off big losses on Nov. 2, they could be in for a surprise.

Across the country, activists say gay voters are angry -- at the lack of progress on issues from eliminating employment discrimination to uncertainty over serving in the military to the economy – and some are choosing to sit out this election or look for other candidates.

President Barack Obama's hometown of Chicago, with its large, politically and socially active gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community, offers a snapshot of what some are calling the "enthusiasm gap" between voters who came out strong for Obama and other Democrats in 2008 and re-energized Republican base voters, including tea party enthusiasts who say they are primed to storm the polls.

Kate Coatar is seriously considering voting for Green Party candidates instead of Democrats, whom she normally supports. James Wyatt won't cast a ballot at all because he no longer trusts anyone to fight for causes important to him.

It didn't help that the controversy over the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy for gays erupted less than two weeks before the election, when a judge overturned it, then Obama's justice department decided to fight the judge's decision. On Thursday, the Defense Department declared that "don't ask, don't tell" is official policy but set up a new system that could make it tougher to get thrown out of the military for being openly gay.

"It's all talk and nothing's happening, and I'm just over it," said Coatar, 62, a church business manager who said she's as concerned about health care and homelessness as about gay issues. "I don't know who to vote for and the election is a week away."

Wyatt, 35, a maintenance worker at the Center on Halsted, a community center serving Chicago's GLBT community, said politicians only court gay voters at election time.

"Once they're elected, they're not fighting for things like civil unions or same-sex marriage or ending 'don't ask, don't tell' because they're hot-button issues," said Wyatt, who usually supports Democrats. "We're just used as a piggyback for them to get into office. It's absurd."

Whether or not that's the case, Wyatt isn't the only one who feels that way.

And in places like Cook County, Ill., where the gay population represents about 7 percent of voters, that could mean the difference between victory and defeat in some races, said Rick Garcia, director of public policy for Equality Illinois. One of those races is a much-watched and close battle for Obama's old Senate seat between Democrat Alexi Giannoulias and Republican Mark Kirk.

"If (candidates) can mobilize the gay community and get them out to vote, it could make all the difference in the world in some of these key races," said Garcia.

But volunteers who've been calling the 18,000 or so members of Equality Illinois to urge them to vote have been getting an earful. Many members say they won't vote or will vote against incumbents, regardless of their party affiliation or stance on gay issues.

This year's election is a stark contrast to 2008, when the gay community turned out in droves to elect Obama and help Democrats regain control of Congress.

"People were clamoring and very excited about the change that then-candidate Obama promised America," Garcia said. "Now I see lethargy at best and disgust at worst."

He said gains won under Obama, including in fighting housing discrimination, have not filtered out to many in the gay community because "the big issues have not appeared to change at all."

"But change takes time; sometimes it takes a lot of time. A lot of folks just don't understand that," said Garcia. "I am older and more seasoned, but most people are very disturbed with the administration ... and they're the hard ones to get out to vote.

"The message is huge: Don't take us for granted."

Tracy Baim, publisher of Windy City Times, Chicago's oldest and largest GLBT newspaper, and author of the new book "Obama and the Gays," said disappointment is showing up in another way: Some are refusing to donate money to candidates until they see progress, although it's difficult to gauge how much that has affected fundraising.

A message left Friday with the Democratic National Committee seeking comment was not immediately returned.

But many gay organizations are working hard to get voters to the polls, fearing they could face setbacks if Republicans retake control of Congress. Baim said Democrats and Obama still enjoy widespread support in some parts of the gay community, particularly among African-Americans and Latinos, and she believes the majority still will vote.

"People are disappointed but understand that this really is the best hope for significant change over the next several years," she said. "But at the same time, the anger is very real."

Robin McGehee, co-founder and director of the national gay-rights organization GetEQUAL calls the mood among gay voters a "disappointment canyon" but said they have no choice but to go to the polls.

She, however, is refusing to donate to or volunteer for any candidate this year. And members of her group are protesting wherever Obama appears on the campaign trail.

"We can't not take advantage of the right to vote, but that doesn't mean we can't vote smartly," said McGehee, of Fresno, Calif. "If I was a leader in the Democratic Party, I would be worried.

"Either we're important enough to fight for our equality or we're worth losing," she said. "Right now we're being treated like we're worth losing."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
Actor and Obama supporter Alan Cumming sharply criticized the president this week for seeking to stay a judge's decision to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." "We keep hearing tht Obama is an ally, t...
Actor and Obama supporter Alan Cumming sharply criticized the president this week for seeking to stay a judge's decision to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." "We keep hearing tht Obama is an ally, t...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 7,085
  • Pending Comments
  • 2
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (127 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
polishlogician
No sugar tonight in my tea..
07:58 PM on 11/18/2010
Obama has done more for the gay community than any other minority....

Obama has done more for the gay community than any other president in history...
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Littlegrr
11:06 PM on 11/10/2010
How many gay people voted for John Dennis?? He was for gay rights.

Gays are working against their own interests.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
zetacplus
Conservatism has failed America
07:06 PM on 11/09/2010
With more republicans coming out in support of gay marriage, and the democrats not doing a thing to support gay equality, I think some in the community are cautiously looking at voting for them during the upcoming elections. It depends on what the republican party does from here. This is an opportunity for the republicans to score some support and I wouldn't be surprised if they decided to capitalize on it. Obama stood for change and against the status quo and so far many have given him a very poor grade in the change he spoke of. When he went on TV and graded himself a B+ I realized we were in trouble because:
1. You don't get to grade yourself.
2. When you do judge your own performance you tend to be more critical
3. His grade was a complete separation from reality and his base wasn't grading him anywhere along those lines. I think the best I saw was a C-.
His making back room deals with the insurance industry, giving billions to bankers, defending DADT in court etc, has caused many progressives and even the democratic base to sour to him.
12:20 AM on 11/11/2010
"With more republicans coming out in support of gay marriage..." Really, could you name three? or even one elected republican?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
zetacplus
Conservatism has failed America
01:04 AM on 11/11/2010
Reps. Joseph Cao (R-La.) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) were co-sponsors of Murphy's bill to repeal DADT. Rep. Charles Djou (R-Hawaii), among some other republicans, have been supportive of it. On the other hand, 26 democrats, yes 26, (that wasn't a mistype) opposed the amendment.
01:10 AM on 11/07/2010
Maybe because Obama is not gay he's not as invested in it? Sorry but it stuff like this that pushed me towards the right when it comes to gay issues. I used to not have a problem with the gays but my annoyance with them started with Perez Hilton and Miss California. He asked her *opinion* and went apesh*t on her when he didnt like the answer. That when i realized gays will attack anyone who doesn't 100% accept them or agree with them
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
zetacplus
Conservatism has failed America
07:15 PM on 11/09/2010
This is why I think you're wrong:

You believe Perez Hilton is what the gay community is about. He's an obnoxious celebrity gossip columnist. I hope you understand that there are many gossip columnists in this country that you may not agree with.

We are speaking out for equality, the freedom to marry, the freedom to serve openly etc. We will be loud because nothing else has worked. It's almost 2011 and the gay community is still being discriminated against. That fact alone is disgusting. This is America and we all have the right to pursue our happiness. If the shoe were on the other foot, I have a feeling you would be marching to a different beat. There are many, many, many of us who don't attack people, usually it's the other way around and we have to defend ourselves. When your right to marry the one you love is voted on and taken away then I think you might understand where we are coming from.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
F---racism
09:35 PM on 11/01/2010
Yeah, signing that hate crimes bill with Judy Shepherd by his side was 'diddly squat' Huff-po? I Say Huffo-po cuz this quote was taken out of context a bit after you read Cummings actual blog.
Kyle Carlson
Progressive Professional Millennial
02:01 PM on 10/29/2010
We need to change tactics to make DADT even more of a painful PR issue for the White House.

There are different levels of judicial review of the constitutionality of a given statute. The easiest standard for a suspect statute to overcome is the “Mere Rationality Standard.” To pass the rationality standard for constitutionality a statute must 1) pursue a legitimate state objective (state as in gov’t, not as in 50 states) and 2) the means chosen to pursue this objective must be rationally related to the objective.

Here’s where the PR attack comes in. Ask Obama/Ax/Gibbs/Whoever what the legitimate state objective of DADT is, then ask them how DADT is rationally related to achieving that objective.

For example:
Press Secretary Gibbs, is DADT a rational method to achieve increased unit cohesion in the military?
President Obama, you’ve stated DADT harms unit moral/cohesion and damages military readiness, as a constitutional scholar, do you believe DADT rationally pursues a legitimate state interest?

The answer will either directly lead to the conclusion that DADT fails the mere rationality standard (i.e. is unconstitutional and should not be defended in court), OR
The answer will show a prominent WH official saying they think DADT is rational – a serious flip-flop and slam on the GLBT community.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
zetacplus
Conservatism has failed America
07:23 PM on 11/09/2010
PBO has already done this flip flop. It wasn't until he knew DADT was dead that he came out and vocalized his support in the way he should have long ago. I firmly believe that the DADT repeal provision will be removed from the defense bill before it is signed. That will show Obama's true colors and his cowardice. Truman issued an executive order desegregating the services in 1948, that's been 62 years now, but gays are still discriminated against. When he desegregated the services it was 3 months before a tough election and 70% of the public was against it; were talking 1948 here. Today, it's the opposite. The public hugely favors repealing DADT by as much as 78%, depending on which poll you want to go by. All we need is a leader to do the right thing, like Truman did. Will he? Nope
02:21 PM on 10/28/2010
I voted already and I left a lot of things blank. I only support those who are STRONG gay rights supporters. Too bad I had no Green Party people to vote for.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chickennwaffles
02:09 AM on 10/27/2010
HERE IS OBAMA'S RECORD ON GAY RIGHTS. Again, there is a bigger world out there.

"Less than halfway through his first term, President Barack Obama has appointed more openly gay officials than any other president in history. Gay activists say the estimate of more than 150 appointments so far — from agency heads and commission members to policy officials and senior staffers — surpasses the previous high of about 140 reached during two full terms under President Bill Clinton."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
zetacplus
Conservatism has failed America
07:26 PM on 11/09/2010
Hiring gay people is not the same as giving them equal rights. I could care less if his entire administration were gay. Companies hire gay people every day. What the gay community is concerned about are the rights we should be afforded as American citizens, not how many gay people the president has appointed. This is comparing apples to oranges.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SonyaInTx
Money doesn't buy class.....
10:39 PM on 10/26/2010
First: He's not even a US citizen!

Second: President Obama has appointed a record number of people who are gay.


For those who have a clue that President Obama is doing the right thing to once and for all get rid of DADT, go out and vote. You have a friend in the White House for gay issues.

You haven't got a snowballs chance in hell with teabagger/republican candidates.

For goodness sake, know what side you need to be on.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chickennwaffles
02:11 AM on 10/27/2010
"Less than halfway through his first term, President Barack Obama has appointed more openly gay officials than any other president in history.
Gay activists say the estimate of more than 150 appointments so far — from agency heads and commission members to policy officials and senior staffers — surpasses the previous high of about 140 reached during two full terms under President Bill Clinton."
08:30 PM on 10/26/2010
In 2008 - Obama personally hired Rev Donnie McGurkin to campaign AGAINST gays in HIS community
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chickennwaffles
02:13 AM on 10/27/2010
Donnie McClurkin is no minister and odes not have the title. he is a closeted RB/gospel singer.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
JonB2057
Think, it ain't illegal yet!
06:18 PM on 10/27/2010
So what?
06:43 PM on 10/26/2010
i honestly don't think it's true that the obama admin has done nothing for gays. they have to play these issues strategically, but when you take a step back they have been working for equal rights and protections under the law, DADT will be fully repealed, and listen to Dan Savage talking about the impact of President Obama's statement for It Gets Better - http://www.frequency.com/video/dan-savages/404634?embed=true
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:27 PM on 10/26/2010
potus really hasn't done much for anyone these past two years of secret white house deals,
cave-ins on social issues, failure to fill appointments, did not close gitmo, put an end to
endless war, etc.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Disciple1
To err is human;To disagree with me is ignorant.
03:47 PM on 10/26/2010
For those of you that are excoriating the POTUS for not simply SUSPENDING enforcement of the edicts: Before you get a shoulder cramp from patting yourself on the back for having the "perfect solution" that the president so BLATANTLY ignored, ask yourself this: " IF this 'suspension of enforcement' had taken place, would that have encouraged gay personnel to come "out" in greater numbers and thereby eased the pain and stress of having to live a lie every day?" Or would it have made the situation for them pschologically WORSE, knowing that, if they were to come out during the temporary abeyance of the law, they would be self-identifying themselves for easier prosecution and dismissal if the courts ultimately decided against them? Sounds like you're thinking about YOUR priorities rather than the condition of those that actually are living through this nightmare.
09:48 PM on 10/26/2010
They could be informed not to come out because we don't know how things will turn out (as they were during the injunction) and the government could still stop current investigations.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Disciple1
To err is human;To disagree with me is ignorant.
11:49 PM on 10/26/2010
So YOUR solution is to CONTINUE having them live in a FORCED state of denial even though that is what CURRENTLY creates the psychological and emotional stress within them? In other words, YOUR plan to go ahead with a "suspension" doesn't address the core issue that plagues the LGBT military person--it FAVORS the ADMINISTRATION by providing the government and DOD with relief from the investigation work and follow-up paperwork required to discharge "violators" of the law.
12:05 AM on 10/27/2010
It's not a "temporary abeyance of the law", since dadt has been overturned by the court. If they were dismissed during this current stay, and it's ultimately upheld that dadt is unconstitutional, their dismissal would be illegal and they could sue the government for damages and reenlist. The government knows this and has made dismissals more difficult.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Disciple1
To err is human;To disagree with me is ignorant.
01:27 PM on 10/27/2010
" IF they were dismissed during this current stay, and (IF) it's ultimately upheld that dadt is unconstitutional.."

You notice anything unnerving about your comment? It appears that you are willing to place these servicepersons at risk although you ADMIT that there is nothing absolutely certain (your "if" qualifiers) about the outcome of this litigation. Playing fast and loose with others' lives are you not? SCOTUS will get these cases--period. That's ONE certainty. SCOTUS' perspectives--especially with the Roberts court--are UNPREDICTABLE. That is ALSO a certainty. In YOUR example, where the individuals sue to recover their positions and back-pay, have you considered the number of years that the suit could drag on in the system? How about employment for these folks DURING this process? The economy is not in the best shape and unemployment is scary high--perhaps you've noticed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Badfinger1
The fist of Goodness..lol
02:56 PM on 10/26/2010
...The far left.....The far right....When you want to play nice,we will be here in the center....
09:48 PM on 10/26/2010
Ahh. Like the Missouri Compromise.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
KhandiBee
01:38 PM on 10/27/2010
Fanned for this comment. The Far Right and Far Left get the most media.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Badfinger1
The fist of Goodness..lol
02:54 PM on 10/26/2010
....Ya Alan....There's been a whirlwind of sheet as of late and he is trying to help "everyone" right now,ok?