DISQUS

Steve Hildebrand · 4 months ago

Aravosis - you are an asshole for suggesting you know anything about my motivations behind writing my piece for Huffington Post. For starters, there is not one person in the WH, the Administration or in a senior Democratic or LGBT role who even knew I was writing that piece. I have never had a conversation with any of the above about what the priorities should be. These were my thoughts and only my thoughts. Regarding DADT and DOMA, you don't have a fucking clue what I'm doing or not doing on these issues. So while you and Joe think you are so smart to be able to "read the tea leaves" - clearly you aren't as smart as you think you are.

To be VERY clear: I don't work for President Obama, his Administration, the DNC or any LGBT rights group. If you knew me a little better, you'd know that I have my own strong opinions about issues affecting our community and our country that no one controls. I've got a big mouth and pretty decent access. Instead of slandering me and criticizing this President, maybe you should thank me for using my voice to help move some very important issues forward.

An_American_Karol · 4 months ago

Steve, your comment shows John is doing the right thing in holding this administration and its apologists accountable.
If pressure is not put on the Obama Administration, and if the President's enablers aren't shouted down, equal rights will be put off until that time President Obama has little goodwill to push it through.
He owes the LGBT community respect and acknowledgement for the support he received during his election.
There is little respect when one recognizes a great injustice and does nothing to stop it.

Liam · 4 months ago

What are you "doing or not doing" with your "decent access" in regard to DOMA and DADT? Anything? You have "never had a conversation" with this administration about "what it's priorities should be?" WHY THE FUCK NOT?! What the fuck are you waiting for?

You are good at calling people assholes, but some basic info in regard to these important matters would be more helpful.

Why don't you use your "big mouth" and "decent access" where it counts? Not on liberal/progressive blogs, BUT TO THIS FUCKING BACK STABBING ADMINISTRATION WHO TAKES OUR MONEY AND VOTES AND THEN COMPARES OUR RELATIONSHIPS TO INCEST OR CHILD RAPE?

nycwill · 4 months ago

You nailed it Liam. Of course, does anyone believe that really was Hildebrand? If it truly was, and he's that defensive and unstable, then we are all in some SERIOUSLY deep shit.

unitednations · 4 months ago

Hey Hildebrand - do you kiss the President with that mouth?

Gridlock · 4 months ago

Oooo catfight! Pull the hair! Meeow!\

I like this part:

"Instead of slandering me and criticizing this President, maybe you should thank me for using my voice to help move some very important issues forward."

Yes, how dare we criticize this president for his DOJ filing that hideous brief, standing behind it, and all the other indignities he's visited upon us since.

I also find it *really* interesting that you don't want people criticizing 'this president', despite never having talked to him.. despite having decent access.

So wtf is your access worth, Stevey? What have you accomplished? You haven't even talked to the administration in any capacity, and yet here you are with a full throated defense of them even though THEY ARE IN THE WRONG and have compared you, I, and every other gay man and woman incestuous pedophiles.

I'm sorry, why are you defending these people, whom you've never met yet have decent access to, again? Do you get off on masochism or something? Do you get glasses of champagne and little artfully arranged canapé's when Obama chooses not to give you a reach around?

Right.

NealB · 4 months ago

Steve: This president has lied, repeatedly to the country and especially the gay community. Lied outright over and over again. He's homophobic and a coward. Demonstrable, undeniable facts. Criticism and anger are justified and appropriate. Obama should be ashamed of himself; you should be ashamed of him too.

Gridlock · 4 months ago

Maybe he'll be "disappointed" once he puts down the KoolAid

Steve Pipenger · 4 months ago

I am going to disagree with some of your assertions. Do I think Obama is homophobic? Not at all. Do I think Obama has lied? Not sure. Do I think Obama has shown a devastating lack of courage? Absolutely!!! Do I think this "reaching out to the other side" is a completely futile exercise? Yep!!!

However, for this fucking nebbish, Steve, to basically insinuate that there is some "secret plan" and that we should "trust him" is complete bullshit. His insinuation that we should just bow down at his altar because regarding "DADT and DOMA, you don't have a fucking clue what I'm doing or not doing on these issues" is absolutely disgusting. This is a perfect forum to say what he is or isn't doing on these issues. I guess, politically speaking, I understand what Obama is doing...he doesn't want a repeat of 1994. However, I'm just frankly sick and tired of my rights coming down to a bargaining chip. Who was it who talked about the "fierce urgency of now?" Oh, that's right, Mr. "Fierce Advocate." I've been in a relationship with someone for 9 fucking years. He's an immigrant...yes, legal. Nine years and I can't sponsor him as my "partner," spouse, or whatever. I'm not alone. When I see someone like Obama counsel "patience," or I see some activist "with the president's ear" insinuating that I should "trust him" because I don't know (wink wink) what he's REALLY doing behind the scenes, I see a complete lack of credibility. Obama has been a disappointment on so many levels (TARP, Bagram, Military Commissions, the myriad LGBT issues). With that much disappointment so quickly, anyone essentially telling me to "trust them" has no credibility. This all smacks of Nixon's "secret strategy" to win the Viet Nam war. It all boils down to one word to me...BULLSHIT.

Jophus · 4 months ago

I hope you've noticed the people here aren't terribly impressed that you may have the ear of the president.

If you are able to help then prove it with action. You're words are useless.

angienc · 4 months ago

Nice professional language, asshole.

Mike_in_the_Tundra · 4 months ago

Are we suppose to have some respect for you? Cutting out the profanity would make a good start. It makes me wonder if you are who you say you are.

JamesR · 4 months ago

Dude - whoever you are - you have an unregistered profile. You are either a troll or extremely stupid or think we are for taking you seriously. Who's the asshole? Why should we take this post seriously?? You have never posted before and offer no verification as to your identity. I sure as hell hope you are a troll - because if you really are who you say you are you are even stupider than your essay and this post makes you out to be.

Kate · 4 months ago

It's a reasonable question - why "read tea leaves" and make assumptions about his employment, motivations and conversations when you can speak to the person or shoot him an email? You're both "A list gays" - don't you both live in the same town, you've met each other at events - probably go to the same bars.

John Aravosis · 4 months ago

Steve doesn't live in DC, he lives in the midwest. And, like much of the Obama Team, Steve talked with us a lot when Obama was fighting Hillary in the primary, and we were one of the first (if not the first) top political blog to basically support Obama. He thanked us profusely for our work when Obama won the primary, then didn't really communicate with us much ever again after that (it's a trend we've seen from a lot of the Obama Team). So, no, there really wasn't a chance to talk with him at all.

Kate · 4 months ago

So - that means you tried to contact him? Or you didn't?

If you did - couldn't you have just done the old newspaper thing of "xzy did not respond to our requests for comments"?

JamesR · 4 months ago

Is this post really from him?

pjm · 4 months ago

Two things:
I generally subscribe to a lot of mailing lists to keep my thumb on the pulse of important issues affecting our lives and to stay invovled on important issues. e.g. MoveOn, HRC, etc. Recently, instead of sending money or dedicating time, I have started sending responses indicating that I really wish I could help them get what they want, but until they start helping the LGBT community get what we want, no deal. Maybe I am being selfish at this point, but being told there are more important issues on everyone's mind that affect our country is just bunk. What could possibly be more important than insuring the integrity of our constitution and equal rights for all American citizens? So with that said, I am taking the eye for an eye apporach and the stance that everyone else seems to be taking on our issues and taking it with theirs. I have more important issues that take priority, so it will just have to wait.
I also think come election time, we need to send this adminstration a message and all who are working for it that a second term is not guranateed and as we have seen in the past few election cycles at all levels, every vote counts. It's time they start working for us or they are out, we do after all put them in their positions and pay their wages.

Butch1 · 4 months ago

The problem waiting until election time is they will lie again about how important our rights are and will promise to "look at them" as soon as the election is over. If we buy this smelly old fish again, it will be our own faults. If they can not get this done before the next four years, perhaps, they will not get a second chance when everyone either votes for another person running on a progressive ticket or they just stay home. Democrats need to know we are not fooling around with this anymore. If they can't or will not deliver, then there must be someone else who will.

cowboyneok · 4 months ago

My gAyTM is closed, as well. I'm not giving to any organization that doesn't insist on granting FULL EQUAL rights. Playing games is over...

Matthew Munson · 4 months ago

Even when President Obama says its up to congress to affect DADT, my congressman who is traditionally very gay-friendly refuses to tell his constituent if he intends to co-sponsor DADT so there would be noted support for it or even tell me his position. And congress is being reluctant to start momentum on DADT repeal.

If Congress refuses to discuss the issue, maybe we need to get Green, Libertarian and Republican sacrificial lambs in safe Democratic seats to discuss the issue and make them talk about it where it would be a priority in the next congress.

DADT and ENDA should be merged together since its related. Its employment non discrimination.

President Obama and the Democratic Party leadership are spineless.

Zorba · 4 months ago

Matthew, you're absolutely right about merging ENDA and DADT. The military blatantly practices employment discrimination. If the administration think it's important that other employers don't practice discrimination, why on earth would it be okay for the military to do so?

thecrustybastard_blogspot_com · 4 months ago

Can't be merged. It's not the same kind of law.

It is, however, an expression of the same principle: APARTHEID.

Gridlock · 4 months ago

More of the same fingerpointing, spinelessness and cowardice.

Cut them all off. Financial and voter support scorched earth policy.

No gay rights = no gay dollars/votes.

Jophus · 4 months ago

If they don't get elected they can still lead great lives in the private sector. We need to threaten them with something more harsh in addition to ending funds.

Gridlock · 4 months ago

What, hunt them down one by one and throw them in Thunderdome? lol

Jophus · 4 months ago

I don't know but I really like the suggestions some people are coming up with. Just rock the boat so hard that action is required for them, so they don't fall out.

NealB · 4 months ago

I was encouraged, slightly, here in Wisconsin where Governor Doyle just signed our biannual budget bill as passed by our barely Dem majority legislature. The bill included a measure that starts August 3rd, for registration of same-sex domestic partnerships. I say slightly because it includes only 40 or so of the 200 rights/benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples, but it's a step forward from the 2006 Wisconsin anti-gay marriage amendment that passed on a statewide ballot with a 60% majority.

We'll see if it's challenged in the courts. But, still, I give credit where it's due to State Democratic legislators who included it and our Democratic Governor who signed it. It doesn't seem to cover anything that my partner and I haven't already made arrangements for in terms of property inheritance and medical rights / decisions. We're going to register anyway because it may be helpful when the needs arise.

I mention this, because I've been wondering recently, in light of Obama's betrayals, if we're not focusing too far away from where we live our lives. Should we be investing our resources closer to home to support elected leaders at the state level to keep moving the ball forward? I'm proud of my representative who voted for the budget, and ashamed of our Republican Senator who did not. I'm going to keep working here in Wisconsin to get rid of Alberta Darling (a typical Republican disaster of a Senator) and look forward to the day when the legislature here gets rid of our anti-gay marriage amendment; toward the day when we, like our neighbor Iowa, permits gay marriage.

No forgiveness for his hypocrisy and his failures, but Obama and his homophobic enablers look around the country and see little "cover" to take a principled stand in favor of repealing DOMA and DADT. Gay people, our rights have always terrified politicians. Obama's typical; no vision, no principle, no courage. A follower, not a leader. It'll be more productive over the next few years I think, to focus my energy on the struggle right here in Wisconsin where I believe there is a real chance for change.

JustAGuy · 4 months ago

John, is there any chance you, or a member of your crew, could get a rebuttal to Hildebrand's essay published on the Huffington Post?

-Sean

Houndentenor · 4 months ago

About 10 years ago I remember a rant from Star Jones about "black leaders". Who appointed those people leaders for black people? There was no election. No one asked anyone. How did they get to speak for everyone in America who is black?

It was a good point and now I'm wondering the same thing about "gay leaders". Who appointed these people to speak for the gay community? Who says they represent our interests and not just their own? When were the last town hall meetings where they listened to what gay people across the country actually care about?

We need political organizations that represent us. The gay organizations have been a mess for a very long time. Maybe this will wake people up. All these years and all this money paid to inside the beltway staff and we have absolutely nothing to show for it. Who is up for actually representing glbt people and not just the A-listers? Who will actually carry those concerns to elected officials and not just kiss up to maintain "access"?

Butch1 · 4 months ago

I'm interested in finding out who the gay organizations in Canada were to bring about gay marriages in their country? They obviously, did something right because we are looking through the window at the border and watching them living the life of equality having their rights on a national level whilst we stand on the outside wishing we had ours. Who runs their organizations? Perhaps, we could pick their brains and see what we are missing. I don't recall them sipping wine and eating little munchies whilst being entertained by their elected leaders. Are we that easily bought off?

Gridlock · 4 months ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_...

There were lawsuits in individual provinces that changed the laws in each (only one province, Alberta, tried to fight it), however the definition of marriage is a federal matter in Canada. A bill was brought before Parliament, and then kicked to the Supreme Court to determine if denying same sex marriage went against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The court said that yes, denying same-sex marriage WAS against the Charter, and kicked it back to parliament where they had a backbench vote on it.

The big thing here is that the definition of marriage in Canada is FEDERAL jurisdiction, thus making it a hell of a lot easier to get. Hooray for socialist governments.

Butch1 · 4 months ago

Thanks for the history lesson, much appreciated.

I agree with your last sentence. I wish this government had been able to see the future, socialism is not the scary bogeyman this country continues to put out as blather.

nekulturny · 4 months ago

yeah, like cuba. cause some nice camps would also solve the problem.

John · 4 months ago

These are good bills that I am obviously pleased are getting attention but President Barack Obama should have asked Congress to send them to his desk within a week of him having signed into law the Lilly Ledbetter Act.

There is no reason why a businessman or woman should consider one's sexual orientation in employment decisions. One's sexual orientation isn't relevant.

And anyone who believes hate crime statutes should be used to protect religious minorities and racial minorities but opposes its use for protecting sexual minorities should be called for what he or she is - a bigot.

The three cited legislative bills should be passed immediately and there is no excuse why they weren't passed by the end of March.

Had Obama demonstrated his commitment to passing this legislation and had the Department of Justice lawyers refrained from either (a) defending the misnamed "Defense of Marriage Act" or at minimum (b) used less gratuitously insulting language in defending the hated "Act" he would have been entitled to some time to uphold the remainder of his commitments - lifting the ban on gays serving openly in the military and repealing the misnamed "Defense of Marriage Act."

He did not. He pressed forward on not one of his commitments, caused us concern by removing some of his promises from his own web page, invited the bigot Rick Warren to deliver his invocation (while at the same time inviting some scrutiny concerning HBO's failure to air Reverend Gene Robinson's prayer), filed (through the DOJ) a gratuitously insulting brief defending the "Defense of Marriage Act," failed to address (let alone attend) one gay pride rally or parade, and has refused to begin the process for ending "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

whatever grace period Obama deserved he squandered because he has shown, through his actions and in many cases, his failure to act, that he cannot be trusted.

Rick Loesser · 4 months ago

Does the Democratic party really expect us to believe that justice is take-out menu where we are allowed one from collumn A, one from collum B, and no substitutions? How many administration officials, senators, and congresspeople does it take to work on any one issue? If there aren't enough, perhaps we should elect some substitutions...

romanalexander · 4 months ago

Generals/Senior Military have threatened to push back, including some resigning in a time of war, if Obama were to issue an executive stop loss order. Can you imagine the right wing media howling about Obama not keeping soccer moms safe from terrrrrists because he's loving ( v. Va. ) him some gays while the economy is in the crapper.
The Christian fundamentalist influence in the military is why they've decided to kick the can down the road. Same mistake as Clinton. Obama should lead on this plain and simple. The rationale is rock solid, as he's previously stated. State the case, issue the stop loss, and as CIC, gladly accept any bigoted resignations. Bigots not welcome in the US armed forces.
That's why I voted for him. And I'm not gay. This isn't a gay issue; it is an American issue.
For shame...

Gridlock · 4 months ago

Well he can always shoot back that firing perfectly good soldiers and arabic translators that keep the soccermoms safe is a good way to endanger the nation.

cowboyneok · 4 months ago

Let's do more than PROTEST. Lets have all the lesbian and gay servicemen who are willing to COME OUT all at once and FLOOD the services with discharges under Don't Ask Don't Tell to call a toll free number. When we get enough of them, we can designate a DATE and then tell them to all TELL in WRITING on ONE DAY and just see how the military handles a massive amount of discharges! If they don't want to have openly gay and lesbian military protecting this country then lets DO THIS! Let them get those 1000's of homophobic straight troops to take their place in this dangerous time! If Obama doesn't want to step up as Commander-in-Chief then he doesn't deserve gays and lesbians putting their lives on the line for him.

Jophus · 4 months ago

G-Day.

Tomm · 4 months ago

G-Day. Absolutely splendid! Talk about "Atlas Shrugged!" Fran Lebowitz said that without gays, American culture was pretty much at the level of "Let's Make a Deal." Straits shd be thanking us for our so far thankless service. Meanwhile, someone shd be polling prominent activists and GLBT orgs to find out who, if anyone, is selling us out by supporting Any sort of go-slo on DADT and DOMA.

Catman51 · 4 months ago

Love this idea. It's what I've said forever, they don't want us, then get out now and leave them stranded.

cowboyneok · 4 months ago

I love it, too, and I think its time! I think we should have a TOLL FREE number for gay and lesbian service men and women to call. We should let them know we are planning on FORCING the military to change Don't Ask Don't Tell by having them come out en mass by publically publishing their names. They would need to be ensured if we did not reach a critical number that would do them some good then we would not publish it. We've got to start playing hard ball to ensure gay and lesbian military personnel putting their lives on the line for Obama are treated like human beings instead of second class citizens!

Gridlock · 4 months ago

Problem is you'll have how many thousands risking their careers, retirement and day to day living pulling that stunt, while the rest of us (non military) aren't really putting anything on the line.

That'll be a tough sell.

cowboyneok · 4 months ago

Yea, knowing the government they would spy on the phone calls / infiltrate the list and discharge them as they called in to tell us they were gay before we had enough to make a big dent in military readiness in order to have the military "give up" the policy.

nekulturny · 4 months ago

Hey, it's Democrats in power, surely nobody would do anything so wicked now! Right?

Indigo · 4 months ago

By focusing on "sexual descrimination" it's safe to dodge issues related to equal rights. What's clear is that the A-gays are comfortable and that's good enough for a one term wonder like President Obama. It's clear that he likes parody gays like Brüno. We have to call him on that. How does he feel about black-face comedians like Amos and Andy?

FunMe · 4 months ago

Oh but, gays get to be invited to the White House.

Whopee!

And don't forget ... Champagne!
Ah how sweet of Obama.

AND out of "fierce advocate" love for us, he kicks in, CAVIAR!


Freaking pathetic!



NO GAY EQUALITY = NO GAY $$$ = NO GAY TIME = NO GAY VOTE!

LeftCoastOracle · 4 months ago

John, can you position an op-ed piece in a national newspaper encouraging all lesbian and gay troops to come out en masse? I doubt that our military can afford to do without 10% of its troops.

nekulturny · 4 months ago

10%, not likely. 2% of gen pop is nearer the mark, and there's no reason to think LGBT are overrepresented in the armed forces.

GusII · 4 months ago

All laudable goals, they can have a cocktail party for each little advance. Now do the harder stuff. If not now, when?

bob_pdx · 4 months ago

Yesterday, I had an opportunity to interview Reps. DeFazio and Blumenauer (D-OR) on video. The event was transit-related, but I concluded my questions by asking about repealing DOMA, and mentioning specifically the criticism the Obama administration has received after filing the insulting DOMA brief.

The responses were noncommittal -- DeFazio basically indicated that this needed to come from "Barney" or other gay leaders, he was too busy already, and Blumenauer, after saying he feels more positive about the congressional environment than ever, would only say "We'll see" when asked if anything would happen this session.

The videos can be seen on YouTube...

Rep. DeFazio:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX8RwxldHdY

Rep. Blumenauer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_srb7u0acbA

Gridlock · 4 months ago

Nobody wants to touch us. We're lepers.

Time we smeared our lesions on their damn faces then.

erip · 4 months ago

As was stated in an essay written by David Mixner i think.
Its time to start using the term apartheid.. this country has gay apartheid.. a completely separate set of rules for a distinctly second class citizenry.
When the mainstream press starts picking up on the use of apartheid.. mr. i am a mixed race man obama might start listening a little more

LeftCoastOracle · 4 months ago

It didn't help that 250 LGBT "leaders" showed up at the WH on Monday and cheered on BHO as he told them that DADT would have to be changed by congress. I lay the blame squarely at their feet.

The Prez has this backwards and we have to keep demanding that BHO issue an executive order to stop enforcing DADT. Doing that would permit troops to come out and demonstrate that the military will not be negatively affected by gays in the military. Then Congress can change the law.

Alternatively, I advocate that all lesbian or gay military members come out en mass and then let's see what's left of our army, navy, air force, marine corps and reserves. I don't think our country could afford to lose 10% of its forces.

Jophus · 4 months ago

GREAT suggestion. Tough for them to do in this economy though. We need to drastically up the pressure.

LeftCoastOracle · 4 months ago

John, do you know anyone who can get an op-ed piece in Stars & Stripes?

Jophus · 4 months ago

I'm not sure this was meant for me.

cowboyneok · 4 months ago

There needs to be a concerted effort to communicate with gays and lesbians in the service and have them DO THIS! All of them COME OUT at ONCE - as MANY as possible and just see what happens!

LeftCoastOracle · 4 months ago

The only way to do this would be through an op-ed piece in Stars & Stripes, and/or in national newspapers.

I'm writing a letter to the San Francisco Chronicle today and the New York times today. Suggest you write one to your local newspaper and to the NY times & Washington Post.

cowboyneok · 4 months ago

People will not come out en masse unless its more coordinated than a letter. This needs to be done with a toll free number where we can control the message and have a MASS coming out. Lets just see how the military operates when thousands all come out in ONE day! The military and Obama Admin is just trying to save money by denying gay and lesbian soldiers and their families military benefits. I think that is the biggest reason for all this.

LeftCoastOracle · 4 months ago

I agree with you. Do you have the resources to establish such a phone line? If so, an op-ed piece in Stars & Stripes announcing its availability, plus letters to the editor to national newspapers doing the same could help.

cowboyneok · 4 months ago

I personally don't have the resources for a 1-800 # right now. I would man the phones and do the work to make it a success, tho - that is FOR SURE!

LeftCoastOracle · 4 months ago

Nor do I so I've just written letters to the editor of the SF Chronicle & NY Times. Perhaps you could write one to your paper.

bruisernyc · 4 months ago

I was BLASTED on this blog and many others every time I reminded people of the despicable gestures Obama was making AGAINST the LGBT community (Donnie McClurkin and his repeated statement that marriage is between a man and a woman, and that GOD is in the mix when it comes to marriage. Despite this, gay and lesbian people overwhelmingly supported him, and blindly so. And now he's thrown us under the bus during his first 6 months in office.

You get what you vote for.

Mike_in_the_Tundra · 4 months ago

I can't imagine what I would have got, if I had voted for McCain, but I'm sure I wouldn't have liked it.

nekulturny · 4 months ago

No really, how much worse could he have been? Witch hunts? Doubt it. He probably hates you less than O, on a personal level. And with the press telling him what to do, you might have got a good deal.

Mike_in_the_Tundra · 4 months ago

Good point, but we would have been getting President Palin soon, and that scares the piss out of me.

nekulturny · 4 months ago

Palin doesn't hate you either. You might weird her out - as evidently she does you - but objectively, she vetoed some discriminatory measure or other as AK Gov, for which she evidently gets no credit from you.

Again, I sense a lot of hate, a lot of anger in President Obama. I wouldn't expect anything good from him without arm-twisting at the very least. And you have little leverage to twist.

To Palin you may be sinners to be helped, however patronizing you may find it; to Obama you are disgusting fags, I fear, good only for exploitation, or abuse when exploitation is infeasible. The recent DOMA defense went beyond necessity.

Obama may fuck you, but he won't respect you in the morning. You have no friend in the White House. With McCain, or even Palin, you might not have an active enemy, but even so, as with Bush (who I would not regard as an active enemy, YMMV), at least you wouldn't have been promised a rose garden.

And if you allowed yourselves to view them as Tweedledum and Tweedledee rather than Jesus and Judas, you could perhaps be more impartial in weighing other positions they take.

superstition · 4 months ago

No, Palin represented the worst-case scenario.

She even encouraged hateful extremism at her rallies. McCain had to try to calm it down.

betsybounds · 4 months ago

I think you guys (and gals) need to get over the notion that Obama is your friend and will advance your interests. He isn't, and he won't. I hate to say that, and I hate for it to be true. I'm a libertarian Republican, and some of my best friends in my whole life have been gay people (I can hear it all now: HAHAHAHA, Guffaw, Snort, PFUI! But, nevertheless, it's true). Dude has used you, and will continue to use you if you let him, and that's about the beginning and end of it. He has allowed you to think that you're using him, but it is not so. He's a user--among other things. He's about gaining and using power, and you are one of the merest of levers. That's all. You need to fall out of love with him, and quit holding your collective breath that he is going to help you. He isn't. You are bidding fair to take up residence on his plantation, the Democrat plantation.

I hope you won't let it happen.

dula · 4 months ago

I agree. Now that Dick Cheney and Barack Obama are about the same on Gay Marriage I'm not able to say what I would have before this election: Your Gay best friends are doormats for considering you their friend when you vote away their best interests. Dems and Repubs are interchangeable now and this gives Log Cabin Repubs cover for saying they aren't single issue voters...it doesn't matter anymore.

mattyj · 4 months ago

Dula,

Dick Cheney is way ahead of Obama on gay marriage. Quote from Dick Cheney: "In reference to same sex marriage, freedom for one means freedom for all. It's not up to the Federal Government to decide what defines marriage. It's up to the states to do that". In other words, repeal DOMA, refer it to the states. That is the fastest way to put this behind us. Most of the conservatives I know don't care who you love, how you love, any of that.

When Obama comes out and makes a statement at least as progressive as Cheney's, then perhaps you might be able to believe in something he says. Until then, he's just another politician...Republican, Democrat, whatever. Lie to get elected, and throw you under the bus unless you can make serious trouble for them.

All the same. Sickening.

Allie · 4 months ago

To be fair, what you said is true of ANY politician. With any 'group' - if it's too small in quantity to make any real trouble for a politician, they'll promise them the moon and deliver nothing. Presidential elections have been choosing the lesser of two evils for a long long time.

Jophus · 4 months ago

I still want to know what happens if you are in the military and you get married in Iowa and your gayness is a matter of public record. Any lawyers out there?

thecrustybastard_blogspot_com · 4 months ago

A marriage is a matter of public record, entering a same-sex marriage is making a public statement of one's homosexuality, so you could indeed get shitcanned.

Jophus · 4 months ago

That is my point. You are exercising your legal right. Surely a discharge for getting married and not actively telling the military you are gay would be a very important legal case, right?

SD_Dave · 4 months ago

Actually in states like California, one can have their marriage records "sealed." This means that it isn't necessarily "public record." However, the domestic partnership registry is public record, there is no provision to have it sealed.

editht · 4 months ago

A list of the LGBT "leaders" who attended the WH event needs to be published.

Allie · 4 months ago

Guest list is at the bottom:

http://www.towleroad.com/2009/06/obamas-white-h...

gaydem · 4 months ago

Ptooooey! Miss Hildebrand, consider yourself doused with a 10 oz. Bloody Mary!

RickInSF · 4 months ago

This is more of the co-dependent, battered-spouse syndrome: Obama and his ilk are basically saying that we won't let them beat you (by "supporting" Hate Crimes and Safe Schools legislation) as long as "youse Gays keep your damn mouths shut."

Obama thinks we should feel lucky as long as we are not getting beat-up or killed. We should be grateful. But we shouldn't ask for anything more (like equality), especially if he has to acknowledge us a human beings. "Just stay in the corner and stop kissing each other." For Obama, its ok if someone is Gay, but why do "they" have to keep shoving their "lifestyles" in his face?

NO GAY MONEY -- NO GAY VOTES. And the same goes to all the Gay "leadership" organizations that are on Castro Street, in San Francisco, every day, touting their "access" to the White House and asking for another hit from the ATM crack pipe.

I do not "Pay-to-Play" to be treated like a human being.

LeftCoastOracle · 4 months ago

John, can you get a connection to the Stars & Stripes for an op-ed piece advocating that all lesbian or gay troops come out en masse?

Jophus · 4 months ago

There goes the Navy.

LeftCoastOracle · 4 months ago

LOL

Jophus · 4 months ago

You have solid independent thought in your blog. Why don't you post more?

LeftCoastOracle · 4 months ago

I'm fairly busy trying to help save a non-profit that I'm involved with. Would like to find time to post more often. Leaving on a month vacation tomorrow (to Sweden). Maybe I'll find time to do so from there.

Jophus · 4 months ago

I think you should. I'm gunna bookmark it and check. I genuinely like your analysis. If your non-profit is political or medical, do you care that I ask what it is?

LeftCoastOracle · 4 months ago

Sorry, had to get some sleep. Am leaving for Sweden in a few; will be back on the 30th.

Non-profit is community based educational org affiliated with UC Berkeley, Extension, San Francisco. Center for Learning in Retirement: http://clirsf.org

I assume you're political because you're on Americablog. Are you in the medical field?

If you're on Twitter you can follow me at PJTibbs. If I have your screen name I can follow you as well. We could exchange DMs and I'd be happy to add you to my blog notification list.

Jophus · 4 months ago

I especially like the April 29th entry. I touched on that today with someone when I was rambling in this thread somewhere:

http://www.americablog.com/2009/07/dnc-may-have...

It was more of a list of why the Obama administration is so much more terrible than we give it credit, even beyond gay issues.

nekulturny · 4 months ago

Air Force, dummy!

ezpz · 4 months ago

I wish they would. Their lives would be spared.

Butch1 · 4 months ago

They aren't wanted by this country and they are also disrespected by being thrown out no matter how many medals you have won for bravery, or how many tours of duty. This is insane and our soldiers need to show them that they will not take hiding or being second-class citizens anymore. An estimated 16,000 gay and lesbian soldiers are hiding who they really are. They all need to stand up, walk out and come home and join us in fighting this administration and Congress. Let this country fight its stupid wars without us.

dalmax · 4 months ago

I've read the essay on HF and I don't read it as this post represents. The title is "Three Laws to Protect American's from Sexual Discrimination"... there's no mention of DOMA or DADT because they don't fit in this category. This also isn't an essay regarding the Administration's stance on gay equality or civil rights... again, at least not as I read it. I understand the frustration that we all feel but I'm also concerned that we are now attacking everyone associated with the administration any time they make statements about anything if DOMA and/or DADT isn't part of what they're saying. Agreed, these are HUGE issues that must be dealt with now, but they are not the only issues. There are other items to be addressed and dealt with at the same time. Just because a gay representative pens an essay and doesn't discuss the plans for DOMA/DADT doesn't make it the end of the world and it doesn't mean that no work is going on. Your response is nothing more than gossip and your own opinion without actual facts to back them up.

cowboyneok · 4 months ago

Oh, really? Go to the back of the bus and sit down and STFU!

Jophus · 4 months ago

Oh that is what STFU means... I've been wondering. It sounds so much different when Obama says it.

cowboyneok · 4 months ago

Yes, he does indeed have a really nice way of saying it, doesn't he?

FunMe · 4 months ago

Plus he gives us champagne and caviar. For free!

"OK you all will go left, then right ... you'll end up in that area over there. So enjoy!

RainbowPhoenix · 4 months ago

In what parallel universe are DADT and DOMA not discrimination issues?

Mike_in_the_Tundra · 4 months ago

DADT and DOMA aren't a discrimination issue? If I'm told I can't do something because I'm gay, I've been discriminated against! I'm so mad, I can hardly type this.

cowboyneok · 4 months ago

exactly!!!!!!!

Zorba · 4 months ago

It's horse puckey for Obama to relegate DADT and DOMA solely to Congress. Of course he can do something about both. With DADT, he can, as Commander in Chief, issue a stop-loss order to prevent the Armed Forces from discharging gay service members, and keep this in place until Congress acts. With DOMA, he can take a page from Teddy Roosevelt and use the "bully pulpit" (as well as behind-the-scenes arm-twisting, which you can bet they've done and are doing on other matters). That he chooses to do neither speaks volumes about his, and Rahm Emanuel's, priorities (not to mention their true beliefs).

heyitsfeej · 4 months ago

So President Pontius Pilate has washed his hands of us and shifted the responsibility of LGBT civil rights to the Judases in Congress. Awesome.

woodroad34 · 4 months ago

I don't really think Obama ever really cared about DOMA or DADT. I'm sure he is aware of the extreme right direction the Supreme Court is now going and he feels emboldened by it. Especially after their decision about the Connecticut firefighters.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/01/us/01scotus.h...

johnnyk · 4 months ago

Another murder due to DADT? It is getting worse, not better. And I thought we won. I really thought things would change.

http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/07/02/as-gay-d...

sonofloud · 4 months ago

Actually I knew from Obama's hate tour of the American South that he had no interest in helping the gay community.
But after comparing our relationships to incest and pedophilia, how could any gay person support Obama?

Butch1 · 4 months ago

Good points.

downtownla · 4 months ago

I think if you compare the way the Administration is handling LGBT issues is sort of the same way he is handling healthcare and other issues. He really seems adverse to sticking his neck out for things. Obama seems much more comfortable signaling his general slant and then stepping back and playing referee. Just like progressives have had to push back on single payer and the public option, I think it's too simplistic to say it's homophobia. It's just a different strategy, one that we find quite frustrating.

NotTimothyGeithner · 4 months ago

Thats wonderful what he likes. If thats what he wants to do, he needs to resign work on his cardio and become a referee. High school athletic departments would probably let him do it for free.

nicho · 4 months ago

Well, at least they've stopped pretending. That's a step forward. We can get out of the denial stage and realize we're on our own.

I will NOT become a Log Cabin Democrat.

Jophus · 4 months ago

Fuck that. It is standing still, not moving forward. They are just showing that they don't see us as a threat and they can openly admit it. That is anything but a good thing.

Edit: It sounds like I thought you think that this is a good thing. I know you don't. Poor phrasing on my part. That is what we would be voting for most democrats: Log Cabin Democrats.

Jophus · 4 months ago

Folks, I'm afraid it is time to look at the broader picture on gay issues. We need to declassify our agenda as gay and call it human rights violations, and then we need to demand that our government cannot put people in prison when they are not found guilty in court. For those who died or were tortured by our government, we need to demand human rights for all 6 billion people on this marble.

We NEED war crime trials. We NEED to pressure Obama to stop protecting murders. This isn't an isolated problem. Our government is systematically removing and denying human rights to all sorts of different groups.

We would get the support of several communities this way, and if we don't get what we want then we

Seek prosecution OF Obama for harboring murderers and violating human rights

Jophus · 4 months ago

We need an open convention for all progressives and to pick a leader for the cause. We need a face for the issue. Things are going to keep getting worse until we actually do something.

Any ideas on who? I nominate Dan Savage.

Butch1 · 4 months ago

I think you're on to something. Dan is quite bright and doesn't mince words about our community.

John and/or Joe would be two other persons I think have the abilities as well. I'm sure there are more. One thing we really have to do is quit looking for these people already in Congress. We need real outsiders who are not corrupted by lobbyists and the fame of being a representative or senator or even president. Boy his that job gone to Obama's head. How many times do we have to listen to him tell us, " I am the president." ? If you have to continue saying that, it sounds like you are very insecure about it.

Jophus · 4 months ago

John is really quick-witted and well spoken on TV. I don't know that I've ever seen Joe, but his posts are consistently awesome too.

I like that Dan is willing to get a little dirty, but when he does he doesn't push anyone away. Plus he has a husband and child I believe.

I just want people to see who they are actively hating and I want people to be proactive vs purely passive on the issue (I'm not insinuating that this blog isn't advancing issues at all). With holding money is good but it seems to put more pressure on the people than contributing to the cause. There is so much pent up energy right now in our community that it needs to be channelled somewhere out in the public's face.

I really like the idea that someone had for mass Telling re:DADT as an act of disobedience too. That would be a mega shit storm. As far as with holding the money, the democrats will just get more money from corporations if they have to. I'm not entirely convinced this is a very productive route, but for the time being it is at least something.... You know?

If I were in the administration and I saw this thread alone, I would be shitting myself right now. Everyone is beyond pissed off and I think it is evident that we, the people, will be the victors here. Not just way down the line either. We are pulling extremely hard to bend that arc towards justice right now.

We are the people, hear us.

Butch1 · 4 months ago

It seems like Congress and the administration need "Miracle-Ear" products handed out to each and every one of them. Either, they are hard of hearing or they are ignoring us. It better not be the latter, as that can be fixed by the ballot box.

Jophus · 4 months ago

You know things are fucked up in this country because I'm slightly paranoid that with Obama protecting domestic surveillance, typing something like that could get me indefinite detention.

Our country is far more fucked up than we realize.

usagi · 4 months ago

Somehow, I don't think the art for his 2012 campaign is going to be nearly as cool as it was in 08.

True Bob · 4 months ago

Have you maybe thought they don't want this issue to go away? This straight guy's perspective is that it works for them like the anti-abortion issue works for the right. If the problem is solved, what keeps the gayTM open? You aren't going to go all Log Cabin to fix it, are you?

Just sayin'...

GusII · 4 months ago

Is Leahy fast tracking ENDA to shut us up?

Hillcrestdenizen · 4 months ago

As we say in business, when a man talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk he is basically an empty suit. Obama is an empty suit.

mikeyDe · 4 months ago

I wonder how they'll frame Obama's 2012 campaign speeches aimed at winning over the wingnuts: "I remain convinced that marriage is between a man and a woman. Furthermore I did nothing toward the repeal of two laws which I consider unconstitutional and detrimental to national security."

Jophus · 4 months ago

I'm sure he will flaunt all that effort that went into giving gays the month of June. The whole 5 calories it costed him.

mikeyDe · 4 months ago

My worst fear is that Boies and Olson will take Prop 8 to the Supreme Court and have it stamped constitutional.

Jophus · 4 months ago

I know this sounds like fucked up logic, but that would actually progress our movement a lot.

Steve Pipenger · 4 months ago

Actually, it wouldn't. A negative ruling from the Supreme Court, on constitutional grounds, would set us back at least 15 (it took 16 or 17 to overturn Bowers) years. Such a ruling would indicate that discriminating on the issue of marriage, at least as far as LGBT people are concerned, is completely constitutional. By extension, therefore, marriage is not a fundamental right for LGBT people. That would mean that our civil rights, at least insofar as marriage is concerned, could be given and taken away according to the political winds (and the votes of any legislature), so I disagree that that would progress our movement at all. The problem is, as a movement, we have probably been too complacent. In addition, I, for one, can say I've heard too many people say: "I don't need the state to recognize my relationship for it be legitimate." Until we can make those people, and ALL people, understand that marriage is not about "approval" of a relationship, insofar as the law is concerned, but it's about the bundle of rights that go along with it (inheriting SS benefits, ERISA, immigration, taxation, etc.) and the various presumptions that the state gives to spouses that if the government can tell "them" whom "they" may marry the government can tell "you" whom "you" may marry.

mikeyDe · 4 months ago

I agree with you Steve. Yes it would make LGBT community angry but it would set a precedent for other states on the marriage issue and on other issues as well.

mikeyDe · 4 months ago

How so?

Mike_H · 4 months ago

Can't speak for him, but I'm guessing it would fire up the outrage and push more of us into action rather than just words.

Jophus · 4 months ago

Pretty much verbatim what I was thinking. Just that the outrage would be on both sides of the issue.

sonofloud · 4 months ago

Obama certainly won't help us.
At least if we get a ruling we know where we stand and how best to fight their arguments.
So what if it takes another 20 years?
Just waiting for the Supreme Court to get enough judges who believe in equal treatment for all people will take even longer.

GusII · 4 months ago

This weekend, my Republican congressman will be in the neighborhood 4th of July parade. I think I might give him a piece of my mind, and probably piss off my neighbors.
Any suggestions on something I can quickly yell as he drives by in the convertible?

This is a Midwestern family event, so watch the language.

Steve Pipenger · 4 months ago

Ask him if he would support a discount on your taxes if you agree to be a second-class citizen.

DLeroyA · 4 months ago

"Honor those who protect our country by respecting their lives"

cowboyneok · 4 months ago

How about "HOMOPHOBE!" or "GAY EQUAL RIGHTS NOW!" ???

Mike_H · 4 months ago

"Equality for Gay Americans".

I think we need to remind them we're full citizens, and should be treated as such.

blackjack00801 · 4 months ago

I, like many others, believed Obama when he was campaigning. John and Joe have been more optimistic than I, who pretty much wrote Obama off on our issues after he made his famous "I don't know what promise they are talking about" comment, the day after the justices on the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8.

(I haven't seen anybody pose the question "How could he not have known?" by the way. Does he not have advisers and people who keep him up to date on the news? I think he knew exactly what promise was being referred to.)

We've been had, folks. And unfortunately it doesn't stop with our just not getting the rights we had been promised. The "Obama agrees with me" squad is now starting to make itself heard in extremely ugly ways: a near-killing by the police at a gay bar in Ft. Worth on the Stonewall anniversary ("happy 40th anniversary, faggots") and the murder of a gay sailor.

We don't have a friend in the White House, as we had been led to believe we would. And Barney Frank and company have also sold us down the river. So who is there left to get the ball rolling on DADT and DOMA? Given the climate in the White House and in Congress, things won't be changing for a good long while.

As I've said before, 2016 anyone? Probably more like 2024 since there will probably be a Republican elected in 2016. Then again, since Obama is starting to piss off others as well, maybe we'll get our next Republican in 2012 which at least means the next Democrat will be in 2020. Maybe we can get some "change we can believe in" with the next Democratic president. It sure as hell ain't happenin' now...

Butch1 · 4 months ago

I won't be alive to "wait around" for these "friends" of ours to do the right thing. We need rights, and we need them now.

Larry Hughes · 4 months ago

Well, 8 years of Obama is an event horizon none of us can imagine, so it's silly to speculate. If he is in office that long, the US will be unrecognizable, and not in a good way.

My suggestion would be to stop focusing on gay rights and start working on removing an extraordinarily dangerous man from power.

You guys screwed up -- you trusted him. Now you fix it.

Webster · 4 months ago

You've got to love the line Hildebrand uses in pushing his "more-crumbs-from-the-White-House-priorities": before one more hard-working American unjustly loses his or her job.

DADT? Hard-working Americans losing their jobs? Does the word "irony" mean anything to him?

revdonnalee · 4 months ago

Another good reason to do the MOW October 10-12

cowboyneok · 4 months ago

March? Okay... but that hasn't done anything, but give us more visibility, to get equal rights. We need to start playing hard ball!

revdonnalee · 4 months ago

?Well it's a start. I am favor sit-ins teach-in's, protests including sit-ins and lay-ins at our enemies places, such as churches, offices etc. I have called for all of these in the past and have had no followers.

?????????????????????????? Yours,

????????????????????????????Rev. Donna Tara Lee

cowboyneok · 4 months ago

Yes! We've got to do MORE civil disobedience!

I'm liking the whole idea of having hundreds of lesbian and gay military TELLING all at once! The military could not AFFORD to just discharge them all, and the American people would BACK THEM UP!

Butch1 · 4 months ago

The military will cut off their noses to spite their faces. I think they would do it but boy, would that draw attention to the White House and this Congress passing the "hot potato" back and forth instead of fixing the problem. They deserve to have all of our soldiers and sailors just get up and walk out. I know I've been harping about this for quite some time now, ( probably pissing off some of the readers ) but I do think it is the correct move to draw attention to this problem. Let's help the government save money by closing down their expensive witch hunts for gays. We also need to put those weasels whose job is to sniff them out on notice. No one likes a snitch and they are neither liked in prisons as well as in the service. They have no honor trying to destroy the lives of others far better at soldering than they could ever be. We could shut down DADT easily by just having all the gays and lesbians leave the service until they are treated with the dignity and the respect they deserve.

Allie · 4 months ago

Sooo, ok - you think the gay service members should all come out en masse to push the gay rights agenda. Or just walk out. You're asking them to risk prison (going AWOL),asking them to risk their livelihood, their retirement, their family and their housing and medical care, their career. What are you risking? I read a lot here about why should gays pay taxes when they are 2nd class citizens, when they don't have the same rights as heterosexual citizens. So - tell me - what risks to your life, home, livelihood, retirement, future, career are you taking? Have you stopped paying any of your taxes? Stopped paying half your taxes? That's as comparable an example as I can find. If you expect gay soldiers to take a stand and accept the risk of prison and/or financial and career devastation, surely you are already taking the stand and accepting the risk. Right?

Butch1 · 4 months ago

My response is attached to your entry below this.

You seem to be aiming your vitriol at me instead of the argument. I won't continue commenting if you are going to make this a personal vendetta.

cowboyneok · 4 months ago

First of all, who is asking them to go AWOL? Secondly, the suggestion was to create a toll free number where they could call and then when a critical mass would be reached then all of them AT ONCE tell their superiors they are LGBT. It would be simply calling their bluff. Instead of picking them off one by one when they get outed then a MASS outing would make it IMPOSSIBLE for the military to discharge all of them. The outing would not occur unless there was enough of them to make a difference to military readiness. I was discharged for being gay so I know what they would be facing, believe me. At this point the only reason for keeping the ban in place is MONEY and HOMOPHOBIA. The military doesn't want to accommodate the gay and lesbians with added benefits for their families.

No one gets put in PRISON for coming out in the military. The idea to do this is just an idea but I'm willing to put my LIFE on the line for equal rights. I would go to prison for it if I thought I could move our rights forward for future generations.

Allie · 4 months ago

The poster I originally responded to suggested they all just 'walk off' - that's AWOL - which you can go to jail for in the military. Even if you reached 'critical mass' - the gov't wouldn't immediately send them all home and discharge them - they'd punish them - severely - and make their lives miserable. And I'm sure if they 'embarrassed' the military like that, they'd face a lot more punishment, if unofficial, than you did when you came out.

And my point was - the guy that suggested it (can't remember who at this point) wasn't willing to take a risk - like not paying his taxes - he just wanted others to take the actual risks.

Allie · 4 months ago

I think the Air Traffic Controllers tried something like that once - forcing a President's hand - and they all thought no way would they all be fired because they provided a critical service - but they were.

Sure, they might not be able to discharge ALL the gay military members. However, they could make life very very miserable for them. And the military is not like any other job - you can't just 'quit' - you would have to put up with whatever punishment they give until your enlistment or commission is up.

I'm all for gay rights, and don't agree with the ban on them in the military, however I don't think your idea is feasible.

Butch1 · 4 months ago

Yes, I think they should come out in mass, that is my opinion.

Since, I have already served my country during a time when "practicing homosexuality" was a crime and there was not support, I didn't leave the service. First of all, I was drafted, I didn't join. There were many straight guys saying they were gay to get out of the service. It was a different time.

Today, there is much more support for gays in the military. If this country is so disgusted with gays in the military, gays should consider whether they should stay in. We don't deserve this type of treatment.

You mention how much they would be losing; may I remind you that there is a fighter pilot with 18 years of service to this country and with only two years left until he retires, he is being thrown out of the service only because he is gay. Do you think he will get all the benefits of which, he is entitled? How much is this fellow losing? No, it's "tuff luck charlie." Why the hell should anyone waste their time supporting this farce? Times are different, and with all gays finally standing up to this government and saying they are gay, will force this issue. Let them try and arrest them, you want to see outrage in this country, this will do it. Many of these soldiers can find jobs and work for people who will actually appreciate them outside of the service.
Perhaps, since there is no leader banding all the gays in the service together, it isn't feasible but, I would like to think of what response there could be to a mass defection. They do not have to go AWOL, they will all be drummed out on the time schedule available. It would be unimaginable how this would clog their system. I think it would work to resolve the DADT issue. Perhpas, Obama would finally, introduce a Stop Loss to finally stop this unconstitutional mess.

This government, in a time of war, doesn't seem concerned about the out come of losing Arab translators and other key personel. So pushing the envelope may work. Just my guess.

Allie · 4 months ago

I agree - they shouldn't discharge gay military members - that wasn't my comment.

First, I don't think the gov't would discharge them all - they'd just punish them in other ways - they don't like revolt. So your belief they could all just get out and go to work elsewhere is a bit pollyanna. Either way - you don't get to make career decisions for others - it's their choice if they want to risk their military career or not. Evidently many do not - or they'd have come out.

My point was - you think they should all do it, are trying to rally people around it. You talk about theory and positions - which is cool. However - when currently - today - there is zero risk to you by this action. I'm saying - if you think all these other people should take huge risks to support their and your rights - why aren't you willing to take the same risks?

Butch1 · 4 months ago

It doesn't make any difference if I do something or not, my life in the service ended a long time ago. I'm disabled and old and certainly no threat to anyone.
This treatment towards gays affects them either now, or when they near retirement. I know one ex-gay soldier, who had to leave the service after 16 years because, inspite of the DADT, they were still doing witch hunts and focusing on the unmarried men were suspected of being gay. The pressure drove him out. The service is not a friendly environment for gays. I can not imagine having to hide my true feelings for twenty years in fear of being found out. I did well enough for two years but no one should have to do this. This is not good mental health for a soldier on top of any combat duties.

Allie · 4 months ago

Thank you for your service, it is appreciated.

But you keep missing the point. It's not about your service, or their service. It's about you asking/expecting them to risk sooo much to take a stand. I'm asking why you are not willing to take a comparable stand with a comparable risk in your current life? Isn't it fair that if they are going to take such a risk - even on a financial level, that you should too?

Butch1 · 4 months ago

Thank you.

Not necessarily. I actually am doing something, which I will continue to keep private. I don't look upon it as having to do something because they potentially will or will not be doing something. I do it for personal reasons.

My point is, there needs to be leadership that active gay service members would be willing to take a chance for anything like this to ever happen. Presently, there are no soldiers I know of who would be willing to take this on. Same goes for other acts of protest in this country. If only one or two people "act up" they are punished by the law. If 500,000 or a million people all do the same thing, it is impossible to punish them all. It takes a leader to bring people together. The gay service members do not have one and perhaps, they wouldn't want one.

The gay "community" certainly doesn't have a person in any leadership position to guide gays either. Things happen grass roots as do most movements. I hope the administration and congress begin to see this before it becomes too late for them to fix it.

Jophus · 4 months ago

What is a teach-in? That sounds like it might be interesting.

timncguy · 4 months ago

This isn't surprising at all. I have seen many posts and comments on other "gay" blogs saying that they (the bloggers and commenters) believe ENDA is more important that DADT and DOMA because it will help MORE people.

brandiparker · 4 months ago

Steve I read your artical and thought it was spot on ENDA and Hate Crimes are to the trans community what DOMA and DAT are to the gay and lesbian communities....yes yes yes I known Hate crime and ENDA will protect the other parts of our community too ,but Trans community is the part of our community that suffers the most and whom the least has been done in yrs past for. They are the ones in need the most.

Steve I would urge you to impress apon the President that if he doesn't come through with some real advances for our community he won't be relected, as he's need the million plus votes from LGBT Americans and he will have lost thier money the many hours of volunteering and thier trust. He needs to start pushing the congress to pass our issues into law. Steve I worked as a campaign Coordinator for him and believed him whne he said he said he supported us and he WOULD do this or that......now that he's up there he's and got that bush holdover in his ear he's backing away from us and has forgotten who put him there. Steve we are watching and you should known the GLBT community never forgets look at the hell HRC and Barney when through for thier actions on ENDA.

Brandi Parker

Semantics · 4 months ago

Very well penned, Johh. Thank you for your strong, crisp, clear voice on this.

Sometimes, when none of the people you count on to lead are leading, you find your way through the pack and start to lead.

Jophus · 4 months ago

I know this isn't the place, but I just saw it. Pennsylvania State Sen. John Eichelberger (R) on same sex marriage in June.

Eichelberger: They’re not being punished. We’re allowing them to exist, and do what every American can do. We’re just not rewarding them with any special designation.

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/30/gays-exist/

Jane · 4 months ago

So sick of Obama LYING!

There a website out there that's interesting: www.regretmyvote.com

Allie · 4 months ago

Great - hopefully those that regret it will make changes in the next congressional elections and in the next Presidential election.

Chris Norge · 4 months ago

Obama's dilemma is the black vote or the gay vote. The outcry from blacks when D.C. city council was significant when they voted to recognize gay marriage. It was so loud that even Marion Barry said he was on God's side (no comment from God on that point so far). There are a lot more black voters than gay voters. A lot more. And a swing of only 20% would be disastrous for Democrats.

joeinmn · 4 months ago

The attitude of the Obama WH on DADT and DOMA has been damn depressing. But, I read something today that gives me some hope. From our new senator from Minnesota, Al Franken. "I'm pro same-sex-marriage". "I think DOMA will be history soon" Hope he's right.

DemocratsAreFascists · 4 months ago

Look, the sad fact is that we thought we needed the gay votes and money, but since Obama went over so big, we didn't, don't and won't need you.

Supporting you would alienate the group that is going to give us a permanent ruling majority: Hispanics.

Once we give the undocumented amnesty, they're automatic Democratic votes.

Eleven million, plus the families they'll bring, plus the ones already here compared to a group that's maybe four percent of the population.

Plus, most of them don't speak the language so they whine a lot less, frankly.

Do the math.

aratina · 4 months ago

Hello! Are you some kind of birther? Not all Hispanics are illegal immigrants and not all Hispanics are homophobic or even heterosexual, that should be obvious. Actually, Obama hasn't done much of anything to help immigrants as far as I can tell. I wouldn't doubt if undocumented immigrants are left out in the cold just like gay families in his big health insurance plan. At this point, I question which minority, if any, Obama has reached out to with more than just pretty words and symbolic gestures.

Allie · 4 months ago

His healthcare plan better not include illegals - they aren't 'undocumented' - they are criminals who broke the law as their first act on US soil - and they play a huge part in the medical costs in this country - as well as playing a huge part of bankrupting states by sucking up services while not paying taxes. Legal immigrants are a different story.

The only benefit on such a recession as we've had is that many of the illegals are going back home because they can't find work.

Steve Pipenger · 4 months ago

I don't like illegal immigration as much as anyone doesn't like. But, really, you really don't know what you are talking about. First, immigration violations are not criminal violations. Why is this important? Because if they were criminal, the government would be required to give them the same due process as criminals get. They don't get this, which is why the government can incarcerate them forever...their detention is not punishment.

Second, you're just flat lying (or just ignorant) on the "they don't pay taxes" garbage. Many do, in fact, pay taxes. One does not have to be working legally to pay taxes. In fact, they are probably a net gain on the system because many pay social security and income taxes, etc. They pay sales taxes, etc.

So, again, while I believe that illegal immigration is a big problem, you should get your facts correct. Frankly, the policies of the US actually invite illegal immigration. When our own government does not enforce laws against businesses that hire illegal immigrants, knowing that they don't have to adhere to minimum wage laws or other labor and employment laws businesses are the ones who get away with murder in this regard. Finally, I'll just say this: in countries that have national health care, they don't ask your immigration status...they do the humane thing and treat people when they are sick. I, for one, am one person who would not mind paying the extra taxes for anyone sick in my country. I, frankly, don't care why they are here if they get sick while they are here.

Allie · 4 months ago

It is illegal - ever heard of the Immigration and Nationality Act? They can decide when caught if they want to have a hearing, or just voluntarily go back.

The great majority do low wage jobs under the table and off the books and are not paying any taxes. And you think that the ones using false papers/identities are 'helping'. How bout the true individuals who make a claim of disability but are turned down because their SSN is being used and therefore the SS Admin determines they must be working - therefore no disability. yes - that happens too. And how about when they use those false identities for medical services - and some unsuspecting American is on the hook for those costs? Sure they can get out of it - but takes a lot of time and money and hits to credit reports. This isn't a 'no victim' thing - not in the least.

I agree that our FEDERAL gov't does not enforce the laws, and every time they try the left screams about 'undocumented workers' and how horrible ICE is - didn't Pelosi say they were "Un-American" for doing immigration raids?

You have a naive idea about providing medical care to illegals. You have this view of some guy having a heart attack and that I think we shouldn't treat him. How about all the pregnant women who are bussed to the border and when they go into labor they try to cross - and because of their labor they are given 'compassionate entry' and sent to a border hospital to give birth. There ya go - another "US Citizen" and anchor baby. Border hospitals are drowning - as are the hospitals in areas with major illegal populations. They come to the ER with every little complaint because they know they can't be turned away due to EMTALA. I know this personally - I'm a healthcare analyst for a non-profit company that owns 8 hospitals (buying our 9th) and some are in high illegal immigrant areas.

thecrustybastard_blogspot_com · 4 months ago

Well this'll pop yer cork: when federal courts scrutinize constitutional Equal Protection claims, certain groups essentially get more consideration than others.

Yes, I do realize the perverse logic.

Anyway, courts examine laws affecting race, nationality, and (legal) alienage with "strict scrutiny. It's very difficult for a law that particularly affects these groups to survive this level of searching scrutiny.

A less searching examination is called "intermediate scrutiny," which applies to laws affecting gender or (illegal) alienage.

Gays get the lowest level of scrutiny — basically no scrutiny at all. It's called "rational basis" review, and it presumes that if any judge could imagine any halfway conceivable reason why a legislature might want to pass a given law, it's presumptively a valid reason.

That is a long way to say that the United States government regards the Equal Protection claims of illegal aliens with greater deference than the Equal Protection claims of gay American citizens.

Have a nice day.

Allie · 4 months ago

Preachin to the choir, American citizens should take precedence over illegals in all matters.

jasonut29 · 4 months ago

Well it continues to appear to me that we as a community need to get and not rely on organizations like HRC to help us...they are now no different than any other of the prime political machines...who's the most is going to get the attention and maybe we aren't giving as much as the Dems who are homophobic so they now will join the ride in the bus we're being rolled over by.

I do have a suggestion....WHERE in this country can we support someone who is not a repub or a Dem and that will support us? Let get behind that person with money a whatever else it takes to get them elected. Lets show these bus drivers that we can organize and get someone elected and lets do it in the next election and lets make it very clear we are prepared to move forward in this manner until we have the people in the congress that will help us. It doesn't seem like this will take any longer than relying on the dems to helps us....they just gave us all the biggest screw we will ever receive. My money is going to someone that will commit in public to help us.

get2djnow · 4 months ago

So the cannibalism continues, at the behest of "The One." I don't agree with your priorities (repeal of DOMA and DADT), but I don't see how anyone can deny that these are your community's priorities.

Some dude comes up to me and tells me that Israel isn't going to be my priority, but interfaith cooperation is, I'm going to tell him where to go.

Millions of dollars fighting Prop. 8 and now this, shameful. But really, who are you going to give all that money to, Bible Thumping Christians?

The saying goes that an honest politician is one that gets bought and stays bought. What you didn't realize when you got this pig in a poke is that you bought a guy who studied at the feet of a gay-basher for 20 years. Check out what Rev. Jerry Wright has to say about homosexuality and it should be clear that the press really didn't vet your guy. You backed him because you always back the 'Rat, but every other person running in your party would have been better for you and more honest than Barry O. Deal with it, 3.5 years to go.

David Jacobson
Cleveland Heights, OH

Mike_in_the_Tundra · 4 months ago

Many of us didn't back him during the primaries, but I don't see that we had a choice in the general election.

nekulturny · 4 months ago

You'd'a probably got more out of McCain and Palin, believe it or not. At the worst, you'd be getting stabbed in front.

Mike_in_the_Tundra · 4 months ago

Also a good point. However, I do care about such things as health care and the environment.

nekulturny · 4 months ago

I'm not here to sell you - not here to sell anybody on anything - but again, look at what we're getting. Many people voted for him because they thought he might be better on the economy. How's that working out?

But aside from partisanship and our differing views - McCain would have just been another president, subject to the usual political forces. Obama is this savior deal now and if he wants you all tattoed on the ass and put in camps to save money and ration care, who's to stand in his way?

Mike_in_the_Tundra · 4 months ago

How's the Kool-Aid tasting?

austinliberal · 4 months ago

ENDA and federal relationship recognition (which begins with repleal of DOMA) are the two most important things for the largest segment of our community. If we get an inclusive ENDA out of the first four years Obama is in office along with DADT and Hate Crimes, Obama will have delivered more for the gay community than I would have ever believed during his campaign. How can someone pretend to be a pro follower of politics and really believed more would have happened? Remember, Clinton was still actually passing the anti-gay DOMA, and Hillary supported it openly during her campaign. While I was offended by the DOJ's brief, I cannot pretend to be at all surprised by where we are and cannot feign horror that our movement will not be over within Obama's first 6 months. As a liberal as well as a gay man, I also believe that tackling the relationship recognition/DOMA issue would still be very volatile and should be done after the health care debate, in which the president is showing great courage and standing up to the much more moderate sell out forces in the party, which this blog has featured.

Howee · 4 months ago

Gays- vote Libertarian!

Tomm · 4 months ago

Someone (hint!) needs to survey the various GLBT lobbying groups and prominent spokespeople to find out how this is playing with them and what they plan to do about it. If someone is selling us out, becausethe sooner we know, the sooner we can start shifting our support to where it will do more good.

A.R. Jones · 4 months ago

You are either on the bus, or under the bus.

Thanks, SUCKERS!

RitornaVincitor · 4 months ago

When Arnold Schwarzenegger ran to unseat then California Governor Davis in a recall election, he repeatedly described himself as "gay friendly". He got large numbers of gay Democrats to vote for him. Within a few years he was vetoing gay marriage in California - not once, but twice - when it was approved by the legislature.

A lot of gay people voted for Obama, believing the promises he made to the gay community. We've been Schwarzeneggered again.

superstition · 4 months ago

And yet now Schwarzenegger is more supportive of gay marriage than Obama is. Ironic, isn't it?