Gays, Guts and Reality: What Time Is the Right Time to Keep Obama's Promises?

I watched the angry elderly set fire to the health care town meetings. I watched the simple idea of a president talking to school kids about hard work and education devolve into cries of "brainwashing."

And I came away with real concerns about President Obama's promises to the gay community.

In the heady days of the campaign -- the sweet season of promise and promises -- there was a belief that, in the same way African Americans saw Bill Clinton as the first black president, Obama would be the first gay president.

I believe, in his heart, he embraces that. But there is a big divide between heart and heartland.

If conservatives can shout down reasoned discussion on one of the most important legislative issues of our time; if they can turn a message to school kids into something so sinister that parents threaten to keep their kids at home, just think what they can do when gay marriage and gays in the military step on to the stage of serious legislative debate.

Somewhere, a chuckling Rush Limbaugh is raising a glass to the very thought.

Mindful of exit polls showing three of four gay and lesbian votes went to Obama, not to mention fund raisers good for millions of dollars a pop, an administration that has been slammed for moving too quickly in many areas is asking for patience in this one.

But for how long? Here is where things get tricky.

Obama recently told a gay and lesbian gathering at the White House: "I suspect that by the time this administration is over, I think you guys will have pretty good feelings about the Obama administration." Not exactly a roadmap.

Neither striking down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) nor allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military will save jobs, stop foreclosures, add points to the GDP or get us out of Iraq and Afghanistan. So there is a logical argument for priorities.

But the priorities are going to have a long tail.

Best case -- maybe deliriously optimistic case -- is that we will be well into the first term, and already getting into campaign mode for a second term, before the administration's audacious agenda is even partially complete. It's doubtful they will want to add diversions to unfinished business.

With success, a large mandate for a second term would create the opportunity for a meaningful push. But mandate is uncertain, and window is brief. Late second term administrations -- if history is a guide -- spend more time fighting charges than driving change.

Six months into a fresh start for America, Obama's approval numbers are already butting into the realities of hard decisions. With more hard decisions to come, at what point will the numbers be strong enough to take the hit that is certain to come from championing one of the country's more divisive issues?

In the past, the conservative and religious right has been able to frustrate human dignity and block social progress because they had the votes and they had the president. Now that they have neither, they have opted for righteous dissonance. Create enough controversy, sow enough fear and maybe, just maybe, we can prevent this administration from keeping its promises.

Standing up to that technology-savvy wall of noise is an act of unusual political courage -- poll numbers high or poll numbers low. Whatever time the administration decides is the right time to launch a serious effort on behalf of its commitments to gays and lesbians, the rancorous shock troops of the right will be locked, loaded and on-line.

There is a line is a Springsteen song, "The River," that asks if a dream is a lie if it doesn't come true. In spite of sincere promises and the best intentions, without real leadership inspired by uncommon courage, those who dream of equality in all things for all Americans may soon find out.

Comments

[tinman1967]

In case you haven't noticed Obama hasn't been too good at keeping his promises.

[madatnewsmedia]

Gays and Lesbian rights, to me, are not a high priority in what's happening in our country right now! I am tired of hearing that gays and lesbians' civil rights are being ignored! It is not a right to be able to get married! It's a choice! I don't believe that allowing gays and lesbians to marry is a right! And as far as being in the military; I don't see what one has to do with the other. Because you're gay, everyone need to know that you're gay or lesbian? Maybe the way the law was written was wrong, but it's the law for now and those who choose to come out while serving the military should honor that until the law is repealed. And when you try to link your plight to that of the Civil Rights movement, you really go too far! You don't have a clue as to what it was like for blacks in the country, even now. To the author; are you insinuating that the president doesn't have guts? I don't think you know enough about this man to make such a dumb statement. This man is trying to deal with too many things and when he doesn't do everything he promised, the country is ready to trash him. I am so sick of this nonsense

[realistic2008]

I'd say, good for you.

[treboi]

Since I'm black and gay I can comment here. While the gay rights movement is not the same as the civil rights movement you are wrong if you think gays don't know what blacks went through. There were gays fighting right beside blacks during the fight for civil rights. For you to try and claim they know nothing is a slap in the face to those gays who fought for YOUR rights. Yes gays don't know what it's like to be black, but you have no idea what it's like to be gay, and while gays should try to understand black better, understanding is a two way street boo.

It's clear you have a problem with gays, growing up in the black community I understand, but you need to do is open your heart with the love of Jesus.

Irregardless of what you want to call marriage (right/choice) it's something that gays don't have and neither you nor the gov't have the RIGHT to tell me or anyother gay individual I cannot choose to get married and have the same rights and benefits you get to choose...as you know seperate is not equal.

As far as DOMA, it's not about letting everyone know you are gay in the military, it's the fact that you can't live your personal life the way straight people can, why should I have to live in the closet in my life outside the military for fear of loosing ones profession?

[treboi]

Doma dadt

[superstition]

"While the gay rights movement is not the same as the civil rights movement..."

The idea that the only civil rights movement is a racial one is very false.

[OdinsEye]

"It's a choice! "

No one has ever been able to determine the root cause of why some people are gay. It may be genetic, it may be learned, or it may be a choice, but the truth is that it is probably a bit of all three and some factors may be higher in some people than in others.

"And as far as being in the military; I don't see what one has to do with the other. Because you're gay, everyone need to know that you're gay or lesbian? "

So you think it is right to make people hide who they are simply so they can serve in the military? Perhaps they should have to hide their religion as well?

"but it's the law for now and those who choose to come out while serving the military should honor that until the law is repealed. "

Have you heard of civil disobedience? It is a method of bringing enough attention to a law to get the law changed. Otherwise, the law may persist.

[Liberal Angel]

Actually, it is a right to be able to get married. Unfortunately, it's also a right to be an ignorant bigot who has no care of what the integrity of country is. Grow up.

[SewaneeLeftist]

Freedom is not an all or nothing thing -- relative freedoms exist. But when you can't get married or you lose your career defending our country because of this incrementalism, people can't wait until it's politically tenable for our government to defend everyone's rights as a citizen. I'm a middle-aged, straight, "opposite" married white guy in the South who attended a historically-male military academy and university, and I've seen the deep-seated homophobia that terrorizes many people in this country almost as much as racism. But I also lived in NYC for 16 years, had many gay friends and acquaintances (some of whom died horribly of AIDS), and I know lifelong gay couples who could teach the most supposedly family values couples -- and of course the Sanfords and Sessionses and the... and the... oh, never mind -- a thing or two about a best way for two humans to live together faithfully and lovingly. And we've seen the dedicated soldiers who have lost their chance to defend their country because of this. At the end, equal protection under the law is the American way and the explicit aim of our President. A substantial number of Americans not having those rights hurts those of us who do, too. These rights aren't some of the relative ones -- you can't partially fight for your country -- so despite the hysterical fears of homophobes, all citizens need these rights at once.

[realistic2008]

I don't buy such arguments about not been able to defend your country, a. you may be a cosciensous objector. Marriage is not a right, is a choice;. not being married does not mean you can't get in line, shoot or stand for your rights;. family values is subjective depending on your believes, social status,etc, as there are unhappy married people there are unmarried happy ones; . yes there is homophia, yes people descriminate but are you the only ones? Latins, Blacks, Asians are descriminated and so are fat and people with disabilities, this does not justify descrimination of course but certainly there is no persecution even though there are some criminal minds who think otherwise.

[OdinsEye]

"I don't buy such arguments about not been able to defend your country, a. you may be a cosciensous objector."

Huh?

[Liberal Angel]

Let me get this straight. You're saying that because discrimination occurs, it's not ok to speak out about it? Your argument makes perfect sense to me. My argument is that since abortion is legal, even late term, I think post partem abortion should be legal as well. In fact I think it's sexist to limit abortion as a right to women. I demand my right to have an abortion, and your ignorance makes a good argument for it.

[BLBass]

Especially for such a well-defined constituency, the threat of withholding institutional support should be a real consideration. Obama does have to focus on priorities, indeed we all face the same mess so failing our economy would hardly help GLBTs, but he should lose structural help within the bloc without at least one significant victory to point towards.

That's pretty much my feeling on most office-holders, btw. They tend to put off delivering on promises until after the next election, and then the next, and then we have to define new units of time like the Friedman. There needs to be some indication that promises will pan out for real. Otherwise there's no reason to put anyone's full weight behind any candidate, for there's no real accountability.

As to getting that win, DADT is probably the best place to start. Obama can stop enforcing the policy (and should already have done so) until its effect on troop readiness can be conclusively investigated, and simultaneously begin to push legislative repeal where the morality of the situation can become a primary argument. The fact of existing law has been explained as a hindrance to any executive order reversing the policy, but I think that's a dishonest reading. The political process holding our nation's security hostage for cultural reasons is exactly why we have a Commander in Chief -- to stand up and say, cut it out!

[sherwoodforest]

I hate to say it- but this kind of post pisses me off. The election was a text book example of what we have to do- and crabbing about not getting stuff all your way is a waste of time. You have an issue- organize and get it going- Obama is not a one man band- and that is not the process we live in.
Government -when it is good- is a contribution and collaboration by all of us. it is not one guy- it never has been.
Obama is a leader of the best kind- visionary and responsible. He speaks of what he sees as the best way- but he is not an authoritarian and we the voters, will have to get the critical mass to make the big changes happen.

We are fighting big corporate interests here folks- time not to bicker, but to organize.

[oafishcad]

On healthcare Obama has been concilliatory to the point of cowardice. Does anyone think he'll show any more fortitude to help gay people? Really? He could of course, But I'm not holding my breath.

[Liberal Angel]

I've read some of the comment posted by others, and many are disgusting. For one, saying Clinton was the "first black president" references not only the trouble he was in at the time, but the affinity the black community had for him. He was perceived as "cool", and concerned with issues important to us. Gays hoping Obama would be the first "gay president" was based on the fact that Obama presented himself as a real ally to us. We know full well Clinton isn't black, and Obama isn't gay. We also know that Obam made real promises to the gay community. Promises he seems to be totally unconcerned with. We don't expect him to do everything all at once. Using an executive order to halt DADT until Congree can pass legislation to repeal it, would be a kind gesture that would go a long way. It doesn't take anything beyond Obama signing a piece of paper. We know DOMA must be repealed by Congress. We're also aware that it's taken since '65 when Medicare was passed, to be on the cusp of healthcare reform. We don't feel we should have to wait to be "prioritized", while our rights as American citizens are being pissed on right now. To all who want us to wait I say this... SCREW YOU!

[antaeus]

Even after Toni Morrison last year clarified her famous characterization of Clinton as "the first black president," it still provides an analog to Obama being seen as "the first gay president." He's skinny. He likes Europe, and it likes him. He's got great abs. He was raised by a mother and a grandmother, and now he lives with two women and two girls. Most significantly, the straight, white, homophobic patriarchy and its sheep think he's bad for their children, that he's not a "real" American, and they're afraid to have him in their schools.

In the context of Morrison's original formulation, the case can be made for Obama being the first gay president.

[Liberal Angel]

I'll never understand why people don't seem to get that. They're so stuck in literal meanings for absolutely everything. Why are metaphors, allegories, analogies etc. so impossible for adults to understand?

[oafishcad]

Justice delayed is justice denied. If, in 4 years, there is no justice for gays, Obama will not get my vote. So what if a republican gets elected? They haven't treated gays any worse. DOMA and DADT were both under Clinton. Sure, I prefer Democrats on all other issues, but I'm pretty sick of the Democratic inaction on equality and justice.

[belyeu]

oafishcad; Go ahead and vote Rep, I'm sure they would ever consider gay marriage or gays in the military.

Maybe you need to give Obama a chance and be patient. You sound like a 4 year old who didn't get their way.

[Idea1013]

If President Obama wants to come back for a second term, he will have to make progress on this matter. That is not to say that he doesn't want to, only that he has not had much time and is probably still weighing the gay marriage issue as a strictly political one. That said, those of us who support gay marriage supported him, in part because he made certain promises on this issue. It will be more difficult to earn those votes again if he does not start taking this issue seriously.

P.S. For all of the commentors who are whining that "Clinton's never been black and Obama's never been gay," please find your local community college and take few literature classes, learn something about the many uses of language.

[superstition]

You haven't been paying attention. The President hasn't simply been passive. His administration has been aggressively anti-gay.

1. He has refused to lift the bans on blood and the sperm donation (GWB), despite the fact that both are always tested. The sperm ban is preposterous not only for that reason but because the sperm of gay men is no more likely to yield gay children (the justification for such a ban in the mind of the bigot). The blood ban deprives hospitals of very necessary blood, including rare types. Both falsely imply that all gays are disease carriers. The fact that heterosexuals can and do use drugs and practice unsafe sex negates the logic behind the ban, especially since all donations are tested.

2. To say the DOMA brief is appalling is a vast understatement! The second brief is merely a rhetorically toned-down version of the same thing. Barney Frank, who waited 5 days to offer a tepid condemnation of the brief was pressured to pretending he hadn't read the bill and praised it. http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/obama-justice-department-defends-doma.html

3. He has FIRED hundreds of troops because they're gay and continues to do so. He fired them. The buck can't be passed. He intends to keep firing them, too. He intends to give Lt. Col. Fehrenbach, a man with an arguably more impressive record than he himself, a dishonorable discharge for his service. (continues in next post)

[superstition]

(continued)

He supports a brief at the Supreme Court his administration filed in favor of DADT, which says it's a "rational" policy in the interest of the military even though the military itself defied the policy when it wanted to (detailed in a once-secret 1998 handbook that said openly gay troops can be forcibly retained, forced to fight, and then face discharge at an arbitrary point in the future) and none of the studies (beginning in 1957) have supported any form of ban.

4. He gave prominence to Rick Warren and Donny McClurkin, while failing to attend Bishop Robinson's prayer, televise him, or give him a working microphone.

5. He promotes unconstitutional separate-not-equal Segregation-style civil unions even though he is called a constitutional scholar by the media.

5. His wife talked of "from Selma to Stonewall" at a fundraiser in 2008 and he said he'd be a "fierce advocate". He once called DOMA "abhorrent". He said a person's military service had nothing to do with sexual orientation. In 1996, he said he supports the civil right to marry "unequivocally". Compare these appearances with reality (his behavior as President).

I can continue, but this is more than enough.

[superstition]

He's too busy giving Lt. Col. Fehrenbach a dishonorable discharge to do what 69-70+% of the public wants him to do: end DADT.

And, he can

A. Stop the firings.
B. Support bills like the Tauscher bill which he DID NOT support.
C. Stop pressuring members of Congress like Hastings to withdraw amendments to stop funding DADT.
D. Stop arguing to the Supreme Court that DADT is a good policy.
E. Stop moving away from repeal to "change/mo­dify/human­ize" (which includes the one-time stealth deletion of repeal from his website).
F. Stop using the "look into it / investigate how to" stonewalling tactic.

He has had the power to put DADT on hold and stop firing troops for being gay from his first minute in office. He has had the power to support bills like the Tauscher bill that he allowed to languish in committee with Harry Reid and other Dem leaders in Congress saying they won't move the bill without his support.

And, why on Earth doesn't this article go into some detail about the DOMA brief and the number of troops he's fired? It's nice to have some lip-service on this topic, but this article really is weak.

[OdinsEye]

Ending DADT means the military will go back to the old days inwhich gays and lesbians were not allowed to serve period and the military could ask and engage in witch hunts. Right now they can only go after gays and lesbians if the person is open about their gender preference or makes a statement. In the past they did not need a reason to investigate.

What needs to happen is a complete rethink of how to integrate openly gay and lesbian troops in to military.

This includes, but is not limited to showers/latrines, tents/quarters, and sexual harrassment.

Probably most of us who served knew folks who were gay, lesbian, or bi and we probably had very little problem with it. However, just as women are concerned about unwanted leering and advances by men (and sometimes visa versa), integrating those with other gender preferences opens up a problem whereby there could be more same sex leerying and advances. It already happens, but it is reduced because of the policy against same sex relations. Once than policy goes away, the system needs to be ready to handle the probable increase in these problems. There will also likely be an increase in hate crimes and such. Again, the system has to be ready for this or simply implementing an immediate change to allow openly gay/lesbian troops could indeed be detrimental to good order and discipline.

[OdinsEye]

Oh yes, and I forgot, the UCMJ has to be changed as well to remove the sodomy article or change it to forced sodomy.

[superstition]

Nonsense. Other countries have integrated. Ending DADT does not mean replacing the old gay ban, obviously.

The argument that openly gay troops are a disruption is not supported by evidence. Anecdotal cases are not enough.

[Dots]

Anybody elected in 2008 was destined to fail because of the Bush/Cheney catastrophic years.
Maybe Obama's tackling things in order of the numbers of people involved.
Economy - Troops - Uninsured - Gay and Lesbian - New Orleans - Debt, etc.
I'm impressed with what he's achieving.

[SonofLiberty1]

The most important things here are the public option for healthcare in that it hopefully will start to reign in the idiotic high costs involved...

And getting Americans back to work.

[oafishcad]

So you think he can't do two things at the same time? Gee, I thought he was kinda smart.

[wtcmedic911]

How about this
1. clinton is white, what fool made him the first black president? hes white
2. obama is half white and half black. unless michelle says he is in the closet he appears to be STRAIGHT. NOT GAY.. So he appears black and straight.
3. it was a campain and people promise a lot during a campain. for anyone to believe Obama was going to keep his word on everything are once again fools. Obama is a politician, period. NOTHING has changed except for skin color and name. He is not a man of the people. neither was mccain. so when people realize obama is a politician life will be better.

[makeshiftriot]

Win. In addition to this people are expecting every thing all at once. If it were that easy to make all these changes we'd have been screwed long ago.

[Queen6]

President Barack Hussein Obama is the first African-American president. He is not homosexual, never gave any reason to believe he was. The first homosexual President will need to be homosexual. Got it? At some point, the homosexual community is gonna have to find a leader who will champion it's cause(s). President Obama is not that guy. Keep it moving.

[Tanyars5]

thank you........I don't think people understand how offensive they can be.

[azbird]

well unfortunaterly you dont know if we have had a homosexual president. You sound like you have some inside info on that topic. Maybe he just needs to treat homosexuals like everyone else.

[antaeus]

The usage is an example of rhetorical license that was originated by Toni Morrison when she referred to Bill Clinton as the '"first black president." In neither case is the statement literally true, although I recognize that figurative language is a challenge for some.

[MemphisKeith]

Queen6, you completely missed the point. Obama actively courted votes from the gay community and made A LOT of promises, which we have not forgotten. Were you asleep during the months leading up to the election?

[Cosatjockomo]

The Republicans lie about what their proposals will do. The Democrats lie about what they intend to do. Figure it out! Its been that way for 50 years.

[belyeu]

Why don't you give Obama some time, he cannot do everything all at once. Right now the priority is the economy, health care, and the war. Maybe gays will just have to be a little patient while Obama works on more important issues.

[vim876]

Don't talk to people like that. Gays aren't children whining for candy. They are Americans standing up for their rights.

[belyeu]

It seems to me that the gay community could be a little less self centered, self absorbed, and self serving for just once. We have Americans who are losing their homes and are out of work. We have Americans who have no health care and are dying. We have a messy war on two fronts. Stop always thinking about yourself. There are issues that are a lot more urgent than getting married or serving in the military so you can openly boast about being gay.

Personally I don't care if someone is gay or not. What I care about is the urgency and needs that effect Americans the most and they do not include whether or not gays can get married or serve in the military.

BTW, What hope do you think Obama would have in passing health care reform if at the same time he was pushing for gay rights.

Gays are not the center of the universe, there are other people with real needs too.

I'm sure Obama will keep any promises he has made but now is not the time. I support Obama 100% and I'm sure he will address your concerns when the time is right, but that time is not now.

[theatrefan]

Thank you for saying this, Vim - people like "belyeu" seem to be so myopic... One stroke of the pen would put the firing of gay and lesbian service members on hold until Congress can revisit the law and correct this injustice. That stroke of the pen would take less than one minute. The rest of the "more important" things, as "belyeu" says, would not be affected in the least. This could have been done on the first day of the Obama administration taking office.
President Obama made concrete promises to the LGBT community that DADT would be repealed immediately. Since 1/20/09, not one Gay or Lesbian soldier should have been fired from the service.

We are American citizens. We are tax-paying, voting, contributing, supportive people, just like every other segment of society. The issues important to us are just as important as any other on the president's agenda... And, as far as being patient, I ask you, "belyeu," why those who have fought tirelessly for this country, studied, trained, and given years of their lives in service have to spend one more day of being patient? I wonder, has "belyeu" given half as much? Would you, "belyeu," want to wait even one day, if your entire career was taken away just for being who you are? Any issue that affects the civil rights of one segment of society affects us all.

Paul Hiatt
Providence, RI

[ColleenHarper]

Obama got our votes (75% of the GLBT vote) on promises of action. Then we had a Justice Department once again equate our relationships to sex with animals! That was NOT the action we expected when we voted for him.

He has plenty he CAN do, such as direct the Justice Department to state clearly that this administration finds the DOMA to be bad law and that it would be only proper for the SCOTUS to overturn it. That would be direct, straightforward, and well within his reach without expending as much effort as he has had to, to support the Justice Department's defense of DOMA.

He can act, or he can ignore us. So far, he keeps pretending that we will continue to support him with our contributions, our active campaigning for him, and our direct action in lobbying for equality under the laws of the land. Our contributions and assistance may not be there next election.

[stryker]

First off, Obama has to deal with the political realities of the economy and the healthcare reform. He cannot afford to sideline those discussions or the anti-gays will make the town hall meetings look like a cub scout meeting. Also, while he may be able to do away with DADT, another president could put it back in place. Surprisingly, he wants Congress to do its job as a branch of the government. Unlike bush,who wanted a rubber stamp for his imperial presidency. All this talk about Obamacare and he has not put forth a bill of his own. All these bills have come out of congressional committees. Maybe he could be more forceful on things, but he is making Congress do what it is supposed to do: make laws.