Words matter, and Michelle Obama is a woman of powerful words.
Last night, in a passionate address to the Democratic National Committee's Gay and Lesbian Leadership Council, Mrs. Obama delivered a rousing call-to-equality and put her husband on record as a fighter for the full equality of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans. "Barack believes," she said, "that we must fight for the world as it should be, a world where we work together to reverse discriminatory laws."
Invoking "those who marched and bled and died, from Selma to Stonewall," Michelle implored Democrats to continue those early crusaders' march "in the pursuit of a more perfect union."
And it was unions, no doubt, that were on the minds of the LGBT audience that Michelle was reaching out to. With marriages under way in California, and a national debate about marriage equality for all couples taking place in living rooms and legislatures from coast to coast, many in the gay community are looking and listening to see if Obama will stand up strongly for our families or allow the country to be divided and conquered over the issue once again.
The question, for many gay voters, boils down to whether the Obamas can change the tone of the conversation, within the country and the party, about what it means to be equal and free?
According to Michelle, yes, they can.
Within her remarks to the GLCC last night, Mrs. Obama shared an extraordinary insight into the Obama campaign's respect for same-sex couples that set Senator Obama apart from almost any other Democratic lawmaker in the country . . . and certainly apart from any other nominee.
The Associated Press, using the creative and unfortunate powers of the editing pen, reported that Mrs. Obama told the crowd on Thursday evening that, "states should make their own decisions on the matter" of marriage and civil unions. But in fact, she went progressively further. What she actually said was that states should "decide for themselves how best to pursue equality for gay and lesbian couples -- whether that means a domestic partnership, a civil union, or a civil marriage. "
She did not endorse the option to simply push any form of recognition to the side.
Those remarks are a far cry -- and light years ahead -- of the characterization that AP used in its reporting. Indeed, it's the (very significant) difference between hiding behind states rights and calling on states to do the right thing.
Michelle Obama's words should also set the campaign apart from the GOP for gay voters who have openly raised concerns about Senator Obama's lack of a track record on our issues. As Senator McCain endorses a divisive anti-marriage amendment in California, Senator Obama and his wife have taken the latest, meaningful step in that march that began in Selma and Stonewall.
"The world as it is should be one that rejects discrimination of all kinds," Michelle Obama told the DNC. And, she made clear, should be one that embraces families of all kinds, too.
"A world that recognizes that equality in relationship, family, and adoption rights is not some abstract principle," she declared, "it's about whether millions of LGBT Americans can finally live lives marked by dignity and freedom. "
"[I]t's not just about the positions you take, it's also about the leadership you provide," she told the crowd at the DNC.
Words are powerful, and on Thursday, Michelle Obama was a woman of much more powerful words than the media is giving her credit for.
Can the LGBT community take heart in the leadership Michelle brings, and in the words she says?
Yes, I think, we certainly can.
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
It is nice to see my liberals friends are just as confused as I am on where Obama stands on same sex marriage.
I see Obama has shifted his position. In SC he specifically said that marriage was for a man and a woman only.
The new position is Hillary's.
Since you claim the AP misquoted Mrs. Obama, it seems like a no-brainer that you would include a link to a transcript of her full speech, so we could compare. I don't see one. Oh, well, I guess we're just supposed to take your word for it...
With that in mind...
(1) What did Michelle have to say about "Full Faith and Credit?"
(2) ... the "Defense of Marriage Act?"
(3) ... extending rights and privileges of married couples granted by Federal Laws to gay couples who have been legally married?
and (4) ... While extolling the Civil Rights Movement, she didn't happen to mention "Separate But Equal" by any chance?
Here. Allow me to spoon-feed you the full speech since you're too busy dissing people to do any actual research. It's available on the O website under "speeches."
http://www.barackobama.com/2008/06/26/remarks_of_michelle_obama_to_t.php
Here's a position paper on LGBT issues from that same website:
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/lgbt.pdf
Let me know if you need someone to come over and read them to you.
If Barack Obama really came out in support of gay marriage, he'd be having to clarify i.e. reverse himself as soon as his advisors finished choking. It's convenient for him to avoid making statements on the issue.
Much safer to have his wife not even really take a stand, but say something to sort of scratch the backs of an important wing of the party, without really doing anything for them.
America needs to realize that gender requirements for legal documents are discriminatory and UN-American.
It doesn't matter if that gender requirement is for property deeds to require a Male signature (as was common practice in the 1800's ) or Marriage certificates to require a man and woman signature.
What I find sad is that Michelle has always represented Barack and his policies so well. She's extremely intelligent and articulate in her own right, just as her husband is. But the smear job the media has done on her is disgraceful. The media's treatment of the Obamas in general and his candidacy has been despicable. Every single gotcha moment is highlighted and played over and over and over again and discussed endlessly by pundits. Yet his policies on LGBT issues go unremarked on and Americans don't get to know what he stands for. He's being defined by the Republicans because the media is so pro-right. Such a shame.
vernonbc
I am with you all the way! I honestly think that Michelle Obama is an exceptional "WOMAN"
She is SMART, she is ARTICULATE, she is BEAUTIFUL, she is INTELLEGENT, and she is CARING! The media's treatment of both Barack and Michelle, has been, to say the least disgraceful and disgusting!
The Obama's are not "yes" people, they DO NOT tell you what YOU WANT TO HEAR, no they tell it AS IT IS.
I have listened to Michelle speak before a group of FIVE THOUSAND OR MORE, she was on her own, no one was there to support her, and she was absolutely AWESOME!
Michelle Obama would make ANYONE PROUD! SHE WOULD MAKE AMERICA PROUD, SHE WOULD MAKE A GREAT FIRST LADY!
Right... Such an unbiased view.. LOL....
and.... Trickle down Reagan was the greatest thing since sliced bread.....
and.... G W the Decider, Mission Accomplished, Bush is the God sent of these troubled times...
WE get it... BELIEFS mentally blind people... Always have and Always will, because that is how strong Beliefs function to create "our reality"...
Some Believe/Perceive the Obama's as their... Hope for Change, Reality... Others, Mc Cain as such...
The Facts are, WE the People are asleep at the Voting Booth... WE have elected, and continue to elect, a Dominant Controlling Corporate influenced Political Party with two Branches into Offices... Regardless whom we Elect into the Office of President, much will NOT change...
Why would WE the People continue to self destruct our Country? WE want to BELIEVE, that WE are the "good guys", even when our behavior as a Nation is NOT so good... Both Branches of the Current Political Party got us into the mess we are in and spent us what (?) 5 or 6 trillion into debt... NOT Bush, NOT Hillary... WE continue to put, or keep in Control, Democrats and Republicans and seemingly, buy into "it's the other Branches fault the Tree is falling over"... Hope change NO THING!
POGO: WE have met the Enemy and IT is US...
clearly, the next few months will be like the last few months
the MSM will distort every word out of MO's mouth
and
more frighteningly, they will continue to give McLame a Free Pass
not one news outlet tonight, not even Olbermann, reported on McLame's failure to show up and vote on the GI benefits Bill, which he said he opposed -- and then today he stood up and took credit for it
I wish the MSM would just half-way do their job.
This election would be a landslide
"This election would be a landslide"
And that is exactly why they are giving McClone a pass. They need to keep the race close so they can up their ratings. That and it is the Repub policies that benefit the big corporations, which the MSM is.
It all comes down to money.
God, here's hoping the find a conscience, and let the truth out in time.
If Obama thinks that it should be up to the states, then he must support California's marriage amendment initiative just like Mccain does. Afterall, it is the state that is deciding.
How is that progressive? Equality can not be left up to the states to decide. CAN NOT!
The referendum would amend the state constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman. Therefore, the correct position is to OPPOSE the referendum. O has already stated that he OPPOSES the referendum. As does our Republican governor Schwarzenegger.
And we already had an exhausting discussion on yesterday's thread about Mich elle's speech wherein I corrected your misunderstanding about our democratic republic, the interplay between state and federal law, and the role of the courts.
But I see you're still here pretending that you don't know any better.
Apparently, you don't know that federal law can trump state law, as well.
Go read the post again, this part in particular:
"What she actually said was that states should "decide for themselves how best to pursue equality for gay and lesbian couples -- whether that means a domestic partnership, a civil union, or a civil marriage".
Got it now?!
Seriously, though --
The whole question of States' Rights vs. Federal Government authority, is really not the theoretical issue that people make it out to be.
When people -- on the right or on the left -- think they can accomplish their aims within the states, they push for states' rights. When they feel they can get the Federal Government to enforce their aims, they push for Federal Government authority.
Look at the Right's stance on civil rights and drug laws. Look at the Left's recent stance on environmental protection and gay rights.
(My view on this question is colored by my memories of the Civil Rights era of the 1950s and 60s. White people in southern states were horribly wrong and acted utterly shamefully. Their only defense was States' Rights -- that the Federal Government had no right to make them stop acting so badly toward some of their fellow citizens. In recent years, progressives have gone to the states because of the retrograde policies of the Bush Administration. Once President Obama takes office, they will again be pushing Federal solutions.)
"If Obama thinks that it should be up to the states, then he must support California's marriage amendment initiative just like Mccain does. Afterall, it is the state that is deciding."
Try to think a little harder about this.
The State of California is NOT pushing the marriage amendment initiave; some citizens got or are getting it put on the ballot for the citizens of California to vote up or down. It's NOT in the state constitution. Nobody knows whether it will be or not. If it's voted down, then it's bye-bye, probably forever.
You might want to try reading the Constitution once. Any powers not given to the Federal government are automatically given to the states.
Look up the Full Faith and Credit Clause.
The three branches of the government are meant to protect the minority from the tyrany of the majority. If a majority can unjustly legislate permanent discrimination against a particular minority, and the federal governement (be it through POTUS, SCOTUS, or the Senate) does not rectify this, then we are failing as a Democracy and ALL minority rights are endangered.
I saw a History channel documentary on FDR, where an African-American activist said he could not consider FDR a great President because a great President would show moral fortitude in the face of political unpopularity. FDR did not show moral fortitude in the face of anti-lynching laws.
No 2008 Presidential candidate has shown greatness when it comes to Gay Marriage. A Presidential candidate showing greatness would say that separate but equal is not equal. What Obama has offered us is practicality; it is better to make progress in incremental steps; evolution not revolution. I do not agree; our system of government was set up for peaceful revolution. We SHOULD have a Constitutional Ammendment, but it should say"whereas the Constitution provides that all men [sic] are created equal, but whereas the States and the majority have failed in this fundamental recognition, here forward all gay and lesbian citizens shall be guaranteed full equality of rights in all Civil law. No State or Federal laws shall be passed abrdiging these fundamental rights." Obama is not a great candidate, but at least he leans the right direction.
Brilliant! Thanks.
DADT and DOMA was Bill Clinton tipping his hat to the right wing--now John McCain is doing the same thing--once the GLBT supporters of Hillary look past their disappointment in Hillary's demise as a candidate, they will realize that we cannot afford to keep the status quo of the Republicans in power.
I've always respected that Sen. 0 didn't run to LGBT publications to proclaim that we should succeed in our pursuit of equality but rather took it directly to the American people. All of them.
I never got over the let down of DADT and DOMA that we were so "blessed" with in the 90's. I never heard any vocal support of the LGBT during the primaries from 0's opponent during any public speech or rally until the day she actually dropped out of the race. I about fell outta my chair. Even in closed meetings with LGBT persons she couldn't bring herself to say the words gay and lesbian. I guess when she dropped out she didn't have much left to lose. Yeah, guess I'm still a little bitter from DADT, DOMA and the campaign. I'm working on it, though.
You only hear what the MSM let you hear, so perhaps you didn't hear all of what Hillary said during her campaign.
I saw a Clip on MSNBC but you should post the whole video and call the AP out on the lie. That's a major issue.
Calling AP on its lies and distortions? Now that is a first. All power to the Blogsphere. For decades, these dunduheads in the MSM world have lied and shoved propaganda down our throat without suffering consequences. Not any more. Good job.
Man must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects...
Loading comments…
Posted June 27, 2008 | 12:39 PM (EST)