The Gay Guide to Obama's Remarks Today
Late yesterday, in the White House's daily guidance email to the press corps, one of the items caught people off guard:
In the evening, the President will deliver brief remarks and sign a Presidential Memorandum regarding federal benefits and non-discrimination in the Oval Office. This event is pooled press.
The networks scrambled to make sense of it and the print media posted conflicting reports of what it meant. What's the difference between an Executive Order and a Presidential Memorandum? Will the extension of benefits include health care and retirement? Will the transgender community receive employment protections in the Federal Workforce? Does Obama plan to announce his plan to honor his promises to the LGBT community?
These are all great questions. Some of them have been answered through the night and others will be answered throughout the day. What is certain is that there is a limit to what the President can do with the stroke of his pen.
What is uncertain is the extent of what he can do with the power of his word. What the President says today will be far more consequential than what he does. Last year, candidate Obama issued a strong statement and his words today should be judged against the vision he laid out for the LGBT community. Here are excerpts just as a reminder:
I'm running for President to build an America that lives up to our founding promise of equality for all ‐ a promise that extends to our gay brothers and sisters. It's wrong to have millions of Americans living as second‐class citizens in this nation. And I ask for your support in this election so that together we can bring about real change for all LGBT Americans....
As your President, I will use the bully pulpit to urge states to treat
same‐sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws....
I support the complete repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act
(DOMA). Federal law should not discriminate in any way against gay and
lesbian couples, which is precisely what DOMA does. I have also called for us to
repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and I have worked to improve the Uniting
American Families Act so we can afford same‐sex couples the same rights and
obligations as married couples in our immigration system....
The next president must also address the HIV/AIDS epidemic. When it
comes to prevention, we do not have to choose between values and science.
While abstinence education should be part of any strategy, we also need to use
common sense....
We also need a president who's willing to confront the stigma ‐ too often
tied to homophobia ‐ that continues to surround HIV/AIDS....
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....
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. Join with me, and I will
provide that leadership. Together, we will achieve real equality for all
Americans, gay and straight alike.
So there we have it. In his own words, he reflects not only ending nearly every instance of discrimination in Federal law, but also to be vocal in ending stigmas and stereotypes. He promises to provide the leadership to make this all possible. Thus far, that leadership has been missing. In fact, his Administration has taken backward steps away from fulfilling the vision he laid out.
Today marks the first time he has spoken about the gay community since his election. That's a step forward, but only a very small step in and of itself.
Here are a few things that could make the President's remarks today a home run:
1. Extending the full range of benefits (whatever they may include) to same sex partners of Federal employees in a lasting Executive Order. According to Chuck Todd of NBC News, a Presidential Memorandum will not last past his Presidency.
2. Calling on the Congress to immediately pass legislation that would extend the balance of benefits not able to be extended via Executive Order.
3. Announcing that he will instruct the Department of Justice not to defend section 3 of DOMA, which deals with Federal benefits, that is being challenged in a federal lawsuit by the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) in Massachusetts.
4. Signing an Executive order that bans employment discrimination against transgender persons in the Federal workforce.
5. Announcing a concrete path forward on repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell
6. Calling on Congress to pass the far too long delayed Employment Non-Discrimination Act and Federal Hate Crimes Legislation.
7. Urging Congress to include the Uniting American Families Act in immigration reform legislation to be considered this year.
8. Committing the National Institute of Health to undertake a new effort for the treatment of HIV/AIDS and the Department of Health and Human Services to commit to new efforts on prevention of HIV/AIDS.
It's not asking too much. It's taken this long for the White House to address our community. There is much to be done to end discrimination and this would be a great start. The President could announce everything on this list today. Don't ask, don't get.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
You people are ungrateful! Based on the fact that the President ran on a platform which he believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, and he only believe in civil union. He always kept on point. The only thing he promised is to repeal DADT. Unfortunately you have the entire military to deal with on this topic.
When Hillary promised to repeal DOMA partially, he promised to repeal it completely. Don't lie.
Yea but guess what? Hillary offered benefits to everyone in the State Department. She fulfilled her promise. I'm glad I voted for her.
That is FAR from the only thing he promised:
http://obama.3cdn.net/36ddd2f5daac41cb21_rym6bxaax.pdf
HIS Department of Justice signed a vile and disgusting legal brief, signed off by HIS appointee, to uphold DOMA, not only bans gay marriage, but civil unions as well -- directly betraying the President's promise to us on the campaign traili.
And I've long since stopped caring about what posts that start with the phrase "You people..."
"You People" I love that.
ungrateful? Really?
Uh, well, speaking personally, I am not grateful to be a second class citizen. I am not grateful for that. But that is just me.
Best,
Philip
Did you even read the above?? He supports full repeal of DOMA, and reiterated that support today.
The text above sites promises that he made when he was running for office. I believe people are bothered that his actions since taking office do not match his words as a candidate.
The role of the military is to carry out the orders of the Commander-in-Chief. They don't get to choose which orders to follow do they?
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/17/obama.gay.critics/index.html?section=cnn_latest
It's the worst case scenario, Lane.
- No repudiation of the legal brief invoking incest and pedophilia in its legal arguments
- No restatement of his pledge for a "complete repeal" of DOMA
- No mention of DADT.
It's beyond outrageous. We have been completely and totally played.
Maybe I saw another press conference than you did, because he did repeat his desire to have Congress repeal DOMA
Well said!
but he didnt demand that congress do it, jsut that he felt it should be done. all talk and no action.
Extending federal benefits is the tiniest part of the promises Candidate Obama made and frankly, it feels a little like getting a moth-eaten blanket to take to the back of the bus after we had to give up our seat... again. In light of the hateful briefs filed in the courts, its a blanket worn thin and a very cold bus.
I have no intention of opening my wallet again until President Obama starts fulfilling his promises. Asking anyone to wait until he isn't so busy for basic human rights is shameful enough, but the briefs defending DOMA and DADT are egregious and unconscionable.
Wayne, I agree with you. Candidate Obama said a lot of things that he as President appears to be back pedaling on. Gay rights and real health care reform are only the tip of the iceberg. Thought he was going to be different. It seems once we elect them it becomes the same old business. I too plan to stop any donations to anything he begs for as he only listens to "big money" and not the grassroots folks who got him elected.
I am saddened to have to acknowledge the LGBT community is starting to sound and act like the anti-abortion extremists. Its unfortunate that you base your support for the POTUS or any other candidate or elected official in a single issue. I seems logical to me the DADT policy for the military is reasonable and necessary. At what point is there an opportunity to gauge the impact on the military? if they are forced to serve in an environment that has the potential to negatively impact their ability to defend, who will defend? In my opinion, this cannot and should not be juxtaposed with race. In my employment I am surrounded by a significant number of gay and lesbian colleagues. Some are still in the closet. There has not been a day when they have not worked duplicitiously to undermine someone, anyone. They may not necessarily be friends with, or even like one another, but they absolutely believe we all should subscribe to their agenda. I am not homophobic, and I do endure because I am sensitive to the need for fair treatment. I do not believe attempting to browbeat the POTUS is the best strategy. I am a minority, I am female, I am middle-age, I do not yet have a college degree. I feel the injustice at every level. I will continue to work to make life in America better for all that I can. I am not going to back the POTUS into a corner.
You don't sound not-homophobic.
Please don't use the words "logical" and "reasonable" until you look them up. You're misusing them horribly.
not an ' agenda ' IT IS THE CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUE OF OUR TIME !!!
So in other words, you are already protected from discrimination by civil rights laws that have been in effect since 1964, and you think gay people should just shut up and wait for equality.
Thank you for your support. With that kind of support we don't need any enemies.
Lucky you're not gay too, life as a second class citizen is worse. And fyi, equal rights for gays and lesbians isn't a one horse show, it involves DADT, ENDA and DOMA which includes over 1,000 rights withheld from LGBT people.
You are not a second class citizen you just choose to claim it. I am black and I get screwed over by everyone. We all have the same rights as individual citizens. You can not be fired for your sexual preference if so you can sue you are protected under the law just like me. The things that I hear the LGBT is fighting for is rights as a couple and those rights will come are coming. Not in leaps and bounds as you would like them too but they will get there. Because someone is not handling a issue the way you want them to do do not mean they are not working on fixing the problem. Try to remember that for everything you want there are groups that are screaming against it and politicians who do not support it. Now if you are a avid reader and follower of politics then you would know these things are not easy to achieve especially with the political scope that is in washington. I am for 2rd,4th and 5th party politcial parties being sent up to our state capitol and or US capitol. I am for young people being placed in office because these are the people who will usher in change not the religious nuts, our people who been sitting in office for all these years.
Please do not give any money to the Democratic National Committee or to the various fronts of the Obama campaign until something significant is done to advance gay rights. Apparently, the only thing the Democratic Party understands is money. As someone who donated to the Obama campaign and spent numerous hours manning phone banks for the Democratic Party, I get numerous appeals for money to support various Obama initiatives. My answer is, "Absolutely not. When Obama has issued a stop-loss order regarding DADT discharges and actually passed legislation that helps end the discrimination against gay people, then I might reconsider." What really makes me feel kicked in the teeth is that one of the bozos that I made calls in support of (as part of the Democratic team) even voted against the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Law, a bill that Republicans from adjacent districts supported!
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/17/obama.gay.critics/index.html?section=cnn_latest
After the President's refusal to repudiate the Department of Justice's legal brief, and his not mentioning his campaign promise of a "complete repeal" of DOMA or any strategy for DADT, and our "friends" in Congress hoping we don't find them, what else is there to do but withdraw our money?
Send it to individual political candidates with courage of action to match their words and to other worthy causes.
Not one red cent to the DNC!
Gay Rights are a simple civil rights issue. The jury is not out on this. Homosexuality is a natural subset and is normal and geneticly driven. To continue to treat homosexuality as a moral failing is wrong. What is worse, we do not treat any other group this way, regardless of their perceived morality. Should we suspend the right to marry or adopt to adulterers? Should alcoholics not get domestic benefits? What rights should we strip from liars and thieves? Wall Street are you listening?
The Don't Ask Don't Tell and DOMA arguments are baseless, and it is time the President and Congress grow up and join the rest of us in the 21st century. If we had loved Bush we would have elected McCain. We didn't. So give us the change we believed in.
By the way, pedophilia involves unwilling victims. Homosexuality does not. Let's please stop equating the two, no matter how much the Catholic Church rejects one and embraces the other.
Ha! Loved your last sentence.
Its called precedent. The brief cited the line of cases that have been used in the past. Any lawyer that did not argue the case the way they did would be subject to malpractice. The man said he would work with Congress to repeal the law.
Not true. All they had to do was file a motion to dismiss for lack of standing since the plaintiffs hadn't filed for and been denied benefits. The need to even cite cases for precedent was unnecessary, they could've had this tossed on a technicality. They CHOOSE to defend it, and defend it vigorously at that by advancing arguments that DOMA is not discriminatory because it does not deny benefits to gays and lesbians, and that repealing DOMA would somehow create an unfair tax burden (as if gay people don't pay taxes or something). It wasn't necessary in the slightest.
In his own words, in one of the presidential debates, Obama said he was not for Gay marriage.
Which statement you choose to beleive is your own choice to make.
He may not personally believe in it, but that does not imply that he would not support legislation granting full CIVIL rights including marriage. The difference is between a personal belief and a civil right.
There are people, including myself, who do not "believe" in abortion, yet are still pro-choice. I believe we as a society should do more to encourage birth control and adoption, but I still support a woman's right to choose. Regarding same-sex marriage, a person can hold a religious belief yet still understand and support the notion that the LAW ought not reflect any particular religious belief, especially since there are so many religions and in America, at least, we separate church and state.
Obama is a constitutional scholar, and as such, I am sure he understands the right and the need for Marriage Equality, whatever we choose to call it. His term is still very new, and hopefully he will get another term. I believe we will hear from him on this issue in a way that reflects this understanding.
.
Well I'm not so sure he will get another term - some people here are already vowing not to vote for him because his administration defended the DOMA law.
I just don't get how the community as a whole, thinks that Obama has failed by not addressing these issues in his short time in office. Obama has been faced with a number of daunting challenges in a his relatively short amount of time in office. Just because he hasn't, doesn't mean he wont. You can not end discrimination over night with the stroke of a pen. If the LGBT community thinks its so easy, why have they not addressed the issue of discrimination within the LGBT community? As a minority member of the community, I have seen and experienced discrimination from my own community on more than one occasion. The fact is that while demanding equal rights from Obama, the community refuses to address its own bigoted attitudes and practices. When an end to discrimination comes, it should be in all forms and for all people. You can't point a finger at Obama without four being pointed back at you.
He DID address these issues and in doing so defended bigotry enshrined in law.
Issuance of a Presidential Stop Loss Order on the Don't Ask Don't Tell dismissals would not take any time and was incorporated in the original bill for times of war. Not doing this while the matters is reviewed and resolved is either lazy or duplicitous.
The brief filed by Obama's Attorney General in the DOMA case was as bad as if Pat Roberston or Jerry Falwell had drafted it. This brief actively smeared homosexuality as a sexual perversion that threatens society. From an Administration that bills itself as a fierce advocate of homosexuals, it was not just disappointing, it was devastating.
This is not good enough. Period.
Choosing Rick Warren to give a inaugural benediciton obviously was a portent.
I'm not sure you get it. It's not the fact that legislation or other legal instruments have not been used to protect our community, it's that we don't even get a concrete plan. In addition, the government is defending the Defense of Marriage Act. Nobody will ever convince me that the justice department had an obligation to defend this ridiculous law.
The LGBT community worked their as*** off to get this man elected. And this is what we get in return? I'm sorry, but the needs of LGBT Americans were also part of his so called "mandate for change". We seemed to have been forgotten or lied to. I guess time will tell. However, I have to say, I was a HUGE Barack Obama fan. But, i'm really starting to question him in a lot of areas. Quite frankly, he has four years to prove himself. The next election, I might be forced, along with most of my LGBT friends, to vote Green.
The president CHOSE TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE and he not only came down on the wrong side he did so in a most abhorrent manner. Now he's reaping the criticism he so richly deserves.
Good point, judging from the replies though its obvious many still dont get it. There is totally an unspoken acceptance bigotry within the gay community. As someone with a partner who is of a different race, I see it all the time.
I am having a real hard time believing the excuses of the Democrats posting here. The point is not that he has not done enough, it is that he has done the opposite of helping. Once again the LGBT community has been attacked, the difference is it was from someone we hoped would help. I only have a very minor beef with the "full plate" argument. It's a big job. But if his plate was so full, how did he have the time to submit a brief that shored up our oppressors?
Of all the post's I have read on this subject this persons hit it home for me
"Obama certainly didn't have to defend DOMA and he most certainly did *NOT* have to have a defense that brought up incest and pedophile as comparable to being gay."
The history of DADT and DOMA are not that cut and dry. Yes it was past during the Clinton administration and like Obama, Clinton promised the GLBT community things he could not deliver. DADT was a compromise that was reached. There is allot more to it then that but it is easy enough to research. Clinton even had opposition within the Democratic party which lead to this compromise. Also I believe that DADT has been upheld five times in federal court, and in a Supreme Court case. I think President Obama realized that which may explain why he backed down but what I don't understand is the language used in their defense DADT and DOMA.
I really though and maybe this is my fault but I thought that the bulk of the Democratic party rejected this argument that Gay marriage is a slippery slope. I really need to know that the Democratic party does not feel this way.
I am not a lawyer, but maybe I should have been. I keep reading that this document "compared gay marriage to incest and pedophilia." Making an analytical comparison in the context of a legal brief is simply not the same as advancing a moral comparison.
One of the problems in the political discourse today, in my opinion, is that being "riled up" all the time is taken as a litmus test for "commitment."
Stating that "the precedent that federal law currently does not dictate that states cannot have different rules regarding how closely related people may be and be married" is comparable to the gay marriage situation is not the same as saying that "gay marriage is like incest."
I think those of us who support gay marriage (and I do) would do better arguing the law without the distraction of the constant uproars over this kind of stuff.
How is this different? With incest the differences are justified, while regarding gay marriage they are not.
Making an analytical comparison in the context of a legal brief is simply not the same as advancing a moral comparison. ------------------ I dont buy this
Through out the past year and a half we have witnessed that Obama is a great speaker he is clear and too the point. Its one of the things that helped him win so why then did he allow the wording in the legal brief to be used. If its not a moral comparison then why not omit them. Because he agrees with them ????
The point is that they didn't have to defend it at all. From my understanding, the plaintiffs lacked legal standing to begin with, so this case could've been tossed on a technicality anyway. They didn't need to cite anything, they CHOSE to. That's the problem here. Had the DOJ's hand been forced, this would've been begrudgingly acceptable imo.
Very little meat on this bone. I'll reserve judgment of Obama for the time being. Meanwhile, I'll give my money to the HRC and take myself off of Obama's mailing list, messages from which ask for more money.
Bravo! That's exactly what I have done!
Giving money to HRC is exactly the same as giving it to the DNC, just going through a middle man. Didn't you see Joe Solmonese smiling and clapping in the backgroud as Obama tossed out the crumbsyesterday? HRC gauges its success but the level of politcal access it is given at the democtatic table, not by the successes it acheives on behalf of our community.
I am so sick and tired of our Democratic "friends" telling gays that we need to sit down and shut up while the country deals with "more important issues." I'd like to see how you'd react if the government mandated discrimination against you.
I'm not angry because Obama hasn't delivered on (or even attempted to deliver, or even mention his intention do anything that one day might result in) his campaign promises to gays. I'm angry over the content of his DOJ brief, which trotted out every conceivable argument in support of DOMA. The far right should be rejoicing over that brief, and I'm sure they'll be using it to further butress their caus against gay people.
No, I don't think the gay community needs to be silent. Silence implies consent to current policies. The "full court press" on the President needs to continue to secure equal rights for everyone.
I also think Obama needs to stop kowtowing to Repubs and push his agenda through. The votes are there and people want the agenda to go through, otherwise Obama wouldn't be where he is now.
There are times whrn politicians forget who put them in there in the first place. So the pressure needs to increase not only on Obama but on all our elected representatives to do the job we hired them to do. If not, there's the ballot box next time. That's what everyone needs to remember.
Mmmm...
The Administration could quell some of this if Obama or Holder (preferably Obama at this point) simply apologize for and withdraw that disgusting brief. How hard is that?
I keep hearing this triage idea of government here. There are many bigger problems to deal with. There is some truth to that even if the ranking is somewhat subjective.
What I think is getting missed is if the gov't had defended DOMA with neutral and bland statements, LGBT folks would still be mad (I would). Many would probably not be as furious as now because it COULD be a delay tactic and a perfunctory defense of DOMA. I would think that if I lived there.The point is, people would have been more patient I think.
But that's not what happened. What was issued was a document that recycled a lot of vile "logic" and talking points that we have been beaten over the head with for a long time. To use the triage analogy, this now wasn't just going to ER and being asked to wait until others were looked at, this was going in, being spat at and told to get lost. You may still realize there are others in greater need, but when that happens many (rightly) don't nod and quietly slink off, they demand answers.
I think Obama has to condemn the wording that was used at minimum. To repair things he has to at the VERY least suggest that DOMA will be examined in the future.That still doesn't fix the problem, but it at least acknowledges that our relationships aren't comparable to, well, what they were compared to in that document.
Do we really need a gay guide? English works for me. I speak English. I am an American. I am not defined by my sexuality.
I'm sure that's easy to say when you have all of those rights that we do not!
Your photo tells something different.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
