Damian Dovarganes/Associated PressTonight, President Obama is scheduled to announce benefits for same-sex partners of federal employees. The Los Angeles Times says this will include health benefits. The New York Times thinks, eh, no it won’t. And last week Obama’s Department of Justice, in defending DOMA, spoke of same-sex couples in the same breath as those who practise incest or might wish to marry children.
So what’s going on? Frankly, I have no idea. I can’t find a coherent story in this mess. I don’t think there is one.
There’s a lot going on in the world at the moment–climate change (we’re all going to die!), weaponisation of plutonium in North Korea (we’re all going to die!), proto-revolution in Iran (they’re all going to get killed!), healthcare reform (we’re all going to be left to die poor and alone!), etc.–but this lack of clear strategy on one relatively simple issue is worrisome. It’s also, of course, pissing me off. Because this really is a simple issue. We’re human being who are being discriminated against. Polls show the electorate is finally beginning to understand that, and are coming to side with us; legislators are mostly willing, and, besides, the Democrats have control of both houses so Obama could make it happen if he was willing to commit. So why is the administration fumbling the ball?
I don’t know. I hate not knowing. Does anyone out there know something I don’t?
Addendum. Here’s a HuffPo piece on what Obama should say tonight. I hope he does.
Addendum II: Oh dear.
Addendumdum: My confusion reaches new bounds…
Nicola Griffith 
Do you ever get the feeling that we ordinary mortals just don't get the game the politicos play? Like you, I am more than stymied by all the trading of favors and votes and futures promised in order to get just one of those/these changes made. My take is that deep in their heart, these guys and gals still have fear. Fear of the queer, the inestimably odd, the strange, the not so understandable but oh so reasonable sci fi iness of “If All Men Were Brothers Would You Let One Marry Your Sister” and until one of them really kicks it, nothing will change except by the inches we've grown weary of.
I have to say I think that is a load of c–p. A handful of relatively minor benefits in a memorandum, not even an executive order. If full benefits can't be given, then stand up and demand they be written into law.
I understand the need to bring people along the path on these things, to trade tit for tat in the political arena.
But at some point (and I think this memorandum falls far short of it) a leader steps up to the plate and Leads. People will follow a true Leader; I'm still looking for Obama to be that person. I think he has reached that time. Better to say nothing than this.
And I think that ties into other issues as well. Be a strong leader in all areas, not just where you think it's politically expedient. Then people will really want to follow you. We need strong words and actions on all of the things you listed, and we need it now.
I'm looking more and more to 'Don't ask don't tell,' too. How can he give federal employees benefits without treating queers in the military as equals too?
But we'll see how he delivers it and what he actually says. One can hope.
I realized I didn't answer your question. Why are they fumbling? I don't really know. But it just seems cowardly to me. He mistakenly thinks he is doing what is politically expedient.
One thing led me to another on HP. I like this (speaking on another topic) from Arianna Huffington,
“Is it possible to have too much hope? To be too optimistic? Yes, if that hope keeps you from facing — and dealing with — unpleasant realities.”
Step up Obama. No more consolation prizes.
Ok, one more thing, and then I promise to shut up. I really am getting back to work.
Barney Frank will introduce new legislation next week – The Employment Non-Discrimination Act. So maybe other stuff is in the works.
He has been, since his candidate hood, pretty conservative about a lot of things. Didn't the corner all the candidates on Logo & ask them about this stuff only to have them all (sans Kucinich, who may be nuts but at least has guts) hem & haw & basically say “you are on your own”? I think Obama is sending a pretty clear message, & like Kanye says: Barrak Obama doesn't care about gay people.
OK, I know I said I'd shut up, but I can't resist this. We already had those rights! Clinton said so in a memorandum years ago – at least specifically on the sick leave issue. That blog quotes a woman who used the benefit.
According to CNN quoting administration officials, Obama “favors” extending health coverage, but they say that requires legislation (as opposed to the other benefits, which I guess only require an executive order). Blech.
rhbee, you may be right that Obama has some safely hidden phobias and that's slowing this down; that's a possibility worth thinking about. But come on, the games are hardly incomprehensible. You do realize that more than 50% of Americans are opposed to gay marriage? It's pathetic and it's horrible, but it's the reality that anyone with power has got to deal with. Political games are how we cope with the fact that half of America more or less hates the other half.
'course, Obama is doing a bad job on this issue, and the Democratic Party in general has always had a certain tinge of wimp—they could learn alot from the delightfully sinister Republicans. But I see no purpose in calling Obama a “politico” and claiming not to understand his reasons.
Addendum (heh—you've got me using addendums):
It is not necessarily the case that Obama has the votes necessary to get rid of DOMA and such. Yes, democrats control both houses, but…have you looked at some of the people calling themselves democrats these days?
I'm not a political operative and I don't know if the votes are there. If they are, then he is being cowardly. But I wouldn't assume that they're there.
jennifer d, crap,yes. Totally '90s, yes.
mordicai, gutless, yes.
rhbee, I think you're right. Fear of the queer. And political fear of the fear of the queer. But someone has to step up. If it's not the Leader of the Free World, who will it be?
anonymous @2:13, I don't like your tone. I'm not 'claiming' to not understand; I don't understand.
Sorry—I was talking rhbee there. But if I mistook her meaning, then I take the whole thing back. I just didn't like *her* tone when she refered to “politicos,” because I admire politicians a great deal. I found no such tone in anything you were saying.
And frankly, I don't like the insinuation on rhbee's part that Obama may be homophobic. It's possible, yeah. But I don't think we should throw around implications like that when it's much more likely that he's just being too hesitant or distracted or has the wrong priorities.
“Political fear” of the queer, though, as you say, is entirely possible, but very different from what rhbee was suggesting.
Anon, in my opinion it's Obama's *job* to persuade the Democratic Party toe the line he chooses, his job to bring the votes. He needs to step up.
As for tone issues, I appreciate the fact that rhbee might have ticked you off with the use of the word 'politico' (I'll let rhbee defend that use himself, if he chooses to) but it's important to stay civil in this space. The use of the word 'claim' felt like a veiled accusation of disingenuousness. My apologies if I'm mistaken.
Anon, I think one leads to the other.
No, you're right about that, I was out of line to say “claim.” My apologies to rhbee (for wrong pronouns, too! curs-ed internet!)
Maybe. Maybe if he stepped up, he could help. Or maybe it would backfire on the gay rights movement. Sometimes, speaking out is the wrong thing to do—at least for the president of the United States. I don't know which is the case right now.
And certainly, polls are starting to trend towards gay rights, and maybe now is the time. But it's a complex and strategic decision that has to be made.
(Incidentally, before I sign off here—I should also apologize for the word “insinuation.” That was a ticked off word.)
Anon, all forgiven.
I can't speak to rhbee's intention, but I read his comment as 'some people', not Obama specifically.
And fear (especially the kind that leads to prejudice) is a very tricky emotion. We can think ourselves free of it and then get caught by it at unexpected moments. We can't help, sometimes, how we respond in the heat of a moment–all we can do is try our best to pause before we act from that fear and prejudice, or, worst case scenario, make amends for acting thoughtlessly. (See my apology a few days ago, sigh.)
The more I think about it, the more I believe rhbee–or at least how I'm reading his comment–is right: that Obama is politically wary of the fear and prejudice of lawmakers and electorate.
I agree, it is a complex situation. He needs to get a strategy. Then he needs to communicate it to us. Right now, he's flailing. Things are, from my perspective, getting pretty random.
“If it's not the Leader of the Free World, who will it be?”
Exactly. A true leader leads. A leader doesn't wait until public or Congressional opinion dictates his/her actions – that is following. Weakness in one area, and not defending something one professes (as Obama does) to believe = weakness in other areas IMO.
And most people really want to be led.
Anonymous @2:13, I don't think that disagreeing on an issue (even one as fundamental to human kindness and equality as this one) means that people hate each other. I really don't believe that 50% of America “more or less hates” the other half. Hate is a very strong word.
Nicola-
Possibly I just take it too much for granted that half or more than half of my representatives in government are terrified of me, (:D) and wrongly assume that that goes without saying, and misinterpreted rhbee from there to be talking about true liberals.
Obama is indeed wary, likely too wary. And you're right: especially with the way the justice department defended DOMA, Obama seems to have lost a degree of control of this issue, and it stinks.
jennifer-
Yeah, sorry, hyperbole of numbers there. *sheepish smile* But I would contend that there is hate between large percentages—just much smaller percentages than that. Say, maybe, 10% hates another 10%. I really do believe there is a lot of hate there, true hate. And alot of the games that are played are to skirt and avoid inflaming the deepest emotional problems of the powerful extreme edges of a conflicted population. Maybe, anyway. :/ Maybe I'm wrong, and I'm not really ready to defend myself except on an instinctive level, but I do think hate is the right word. Not 50%, though.
If there were any doubt before his election, and there wasn't much, Obama showed his true colors when he surrounded himself with party hacks of the Clinton-Emmanuel-Geithner variety, and not one person who might have brought him news from outside the DLC box. (Of course it's arguable that he showed his true colors when he accepted Liebermann as his mentor in the Senate and proceeded to play it utterly safe thereafter.)
I don't think Obama is afraid of “the deepest emotional problems of the powerful extreme edges of a conflicted population.” He's doing his best not to know what the population is thinking. (You didn't take his “town meetings” seriously, did you? It was clear from the first that he wasn't listening to the people in the audience, just pushing his own talking points.) All the people who said after his election that we should give him time, wait and see, it's too early to say what he's going to do? It's too late now; that was when he sealed himself hermetically into a world where he can't be reached by anyone but the rich and powerful.
Judging from his first book, he used to know better, but even the introduction he wrote to the reissue shows his prose getting slacker, dumber. His public remarks on gay people, as on so many issues, show a typical clueless liberal: pretty rhetoric about equal rights, etc., but no real understanding or substance.
I'm doing the “I Told You So” dance here, but that's not important. What is important, I think, is that so many people deluded themselves, joyously, exultantly, about the man they were supporting and voting for. And even now they're mainly upset because they're being frustrated on their pet issue. An issue which isn't nearly as cut-and-dried as they seem to think, I might add, but that's not really important either. The important thing is that they're in no position to condemn their opponents for irrationality or ignorance, traits which Obama's fans have exhibited in abundance.
Anon – sure, I agree that there is some hate out there. Hard to know in this media when someone is not being literal. And how much hate stems from fear? I don't know.
Obama said his piece, and in my mind it wasn't enough. The whole thing is disappointing. The timing – with people pulling out of that DNC fundraiser because of the DOMA incident. The wording of that DOJ brief re: DOMA and the subsequent failure of the White House to denounce the wording that included that stuff about pedophilia and incest. Too coincidental.
That new bill doesn't sound like much; the full text remains to be seen, but at least it's something.
If all this is supposed to be a step in the right direction, it seems more like walking in place to me. And we need large strides right now. In this and with the environmental issues, etc.
And it sounds like they could've gotten around DOMA anyway by just issuing an executive order extending benefits to domestic partners as well as 'married people.' Like many companies do already.
We have to keep being vocal about this stuff. We have wake up and keep everyone else awake too. Hard choices will have to be made on a lot of things, and we are going to need each other to do what needs to be done. It would be nice if they could get over themselves and bring us into the fold. We've got other work to do.
Now this is what I'm talking about – true activism. How come I haven't been to any of those kinds of rallies?
I never considered Obama to be a miracle worker, just a fairly smart man, so I guess I'm not surprised by any of this.
I loved the “kiss in”. Brilliant stuff. I'm surprised more people from the street didn't just join in. Sheesh. If my husband and I had been there, we would've.
I guess I didn't think it would take a miracle, just a pretty smart, brave man. A true leader.
But hey — it's not over yet.
More kissing! At the march in D.C. Oct. 11 – National Coming Out Day. Support them by staging a Kiss In everywhere! Tweet that! Facebook it.
That ought to scare the piss out of them. :)
The kiss-in is awesome.
I didn't exactly say (or mean) that Obama is afraid or even wary of the hateful edges, Promiscous Reader, so much as he is wary of the vast proportion of the population that is swayed by the hateful edges into unthoughtful bigotry.
As for the rest, Reader, I shall only say that you are quite wrong on many counts, but above all: Rahm Emanuel is much too devilishly handsome to be dismissed like that.
Mutiply how many wait for the change times how long they have been waiting times what the waiting has done to each personally times how long we must wait for the person we voted to be in charge of this change takes to get his ass in gear = politico.
Fear, you can see it in their eyes. You can hear it in their mumbled replies. You can feel it as time just flies and flies and flies.