As the Pelosi Democrats prepare to yield power in the House to the Boehner Republicans, I wonder whether in the various meeting rooms of the gay groups in our nation’s capital, they are developing strategies to reach out to people whose language many of the groups’ leaders are loath to understand: Republicans.
I wonder as well what kind of meetings these groups had two years ago, as Democrats cemented their control of Congress and were about to take control of the executive branch. Did they just exult in the electoral successes of their preferred political party, believing that because the then-incoming majority was filled with well-meaning liberals who loved the gays that they were sure to act swiftly on their policy priorities? Or did they develop a strategy to ensure that the Democrats kept their promises on a whole range of issues from repeal of DADT and DOMA to passage of ENDA as well as legislation recognizing same-sex civil unions.
It would seem that the smart strategy would have been to prioritize those issues so as to work on them one at a time, starting with the proverbial lowest hanging fruit, the most popular legislation. Then, with priorities in place, they would be better prepared to reach out to their allies on the Hill and in the Administration to develop a time-frame for each. Perhaps, they did develop such a strategy and from my perspective here on the West Coast, I was not privy to it.
But, from the various releases I received from these groups — not to mention the knowledge I gained reading their web-sites — it seemed they had adopted a scattershot approach, reminding us of the imperative of each of these issues instead of choosing to prioritize these issues and push them one at a time. Perhaps, had they concentrated early on on repealing DADT (a proposition which enjoys popular support, even among conservatives), we would not be hoping that Senate Democrats could pass something in the lame-duck session of Congress that the failed to move during the heyday of their power.
That said, we can’t change the past. If these groups didn’t develop a strategy for action, their leaders should step down to make way for those better equipped at developing a plan for action, individuals not just with an understanding of the tactics necessary to move legislation, but men and women who are also able to make the case for their agenda in terms Republicans as well as Democrats can understand.
Thank God the Republicans are in charge. Finally we will get some pro gay legislation passed. It’s smooth sailing from here. I just hope those damn Democrats don’t block this abundance of pro gay legislation likely to be put forth by the Republicans.
>giggle<
so nice of you, jomama, to address the points I raised in my post & the questions I asked.
I doubt they’ve done a damned thing and are undoubtedly still shell-shocked from the mid-terms. Did you seriously expect anything more?
However, rather than sniping at these groups what has GOProud and any other like-minded groups done to reach out to Democrats who will be in control of the Senate, let alone Obama? I see LCR taking some action on DADT repeal but nothing save words from GOProud for something that is supposedly a legislative priority for them.
Anytime B. Dan.
btw, you are cute, would you mind showing use a pic of you shirtless?
Jomama, I think it would depend on what you consider ‘pro-gay’ legislation. Do you mean legislation that will single out gays to the exclusion of all other groups, or simply efforts that will benefit a wide range of Americans, including those who happen to be attracted to members of the same sex?
Yes I mean legislation that single out gays to the exclusion of all other groups. I want to take rights away from all other groups and give it to gays instead. First off we should not allow opposite sex marriage, nor straights in the military.
SHeesh Kepri, use your imagination.
In other words, why do gay orginizations like GoProud exist, to push republicans to pass legislation of interest to gays, or to celibrate the fact that they already do this?
Pro-gay legislation could mean legislation that, for the most part, effects gays. For example DADT or Gay Marriage, immigration rights, etc. One could argue that these issues are important to nation as a whole, but for lack of a better term, “gay legislation” works.
Where the hell is all that “pro-gay” legislation from you BFF liberals who had a majority? Oh yeah. They sucked up to the unions and trial lawyers instead. You get more burdensome regulation and higher taxes that you voted for.
So much for that. Cheers.
And who could ever forget gays got shat on big time by Chairman Obama and his DoJ.
Ah, then going by your standards, I doubt that even Democrats will ever pass ‘pro-gay’ legislation. Looking at all the effort they’ve put into making sure that their own, feeble, attempts to undo DADT failed, it’s pretty clear that they don’t actually consider ‘gay legislation’ a priority.
You’ve got a chance with Republicans though, it’s just a matter of presenting the issue in the proper way. From a Republican viewpoint the issue should not be about whether or not openly gay men and women should serve in the armed forces, but, since DADT has not prevented gay men and women from serving their country, it should be about how much the military would suffer from the loss of talented and effective individuals being discharged for no reason other than word getting out about who they may or may not be attracted to.
Yes Khepri, but back in the real world…
Alright, back in the real world what have the Democrats actually done for gays? I don’t want to hear the terrible things some Republicans have said about gays, I want to see examples of actual good things Democrats have done, not things they’ve tried to do, but what they’ve actually accomplished.
Excellent closing point – Any issue to take hold it must be one that is able to span the chasm of Democrat and Republican. We don’t do ourselves any good falling into the polarized rhetoric that’s splitting people who could be partners.
The next two years will be interesting. As a DC gay (though not employed for that cause) it seems that the biggest debate is not the topics but the method: which branch and which level…. state, national, judicial, legislative, executive….
We could all benefit from a little more focus and centralized strategy.
Amen! Pro-growth, pro-employment, pro-Constitution, government-limiting, liberty defending legislation is the most pro-gay legislation there is!
And that’s what Republicans will give us, and the exact opposite of the corrupt, anti-American, pro-dependency legislation Obama and Democrats have been pushing.
” I don’t want to hear the terrible things some Republicans have said about gays, I want to see examples of actual good things Democrats have done”
That is a reasonable statement Khepri. What are you doing here? 🙂
Then what you are saying American Elephant is that there is no need for a gay person to join GoProud and that GoProud has no reason to exist. A gay person should simply join the John Birch Society.
No, I’m not saying that at all. I’m saying economic growth, opportunity, and protecting life, liberty and actual rights are far more important to and better for gays than the Democrat agenda and the devastation “progressive” policies have wrought on all Americans’ lives and liberty.
And I may be mistaken, but it is my belief that GOProud exists to advocate a similar message. I’m not sure how much of their mission is to advocate for what you call “gay issues”, you’d have to ask them. And the more groups that fight for conservative, constitutional governance, the better off gays, and everyone else will be.
It is sad that so many on the left are willing to trade away liberty and economic freedom in exchange for a little pat on the head from a politician.
It’s either cojones or serious self-loathing to think the liberals give two shits about gays. I suppose if you can believe the folks who’ve fought for slavery for so long aren’t racists and they support Hamas because they love the Jews, you’re stupid enough to believe anything.
Really? Al Sharpton says Rush is a “race baiter”? Really?
Gotta be dumber than a brick to buy into that.
Dan, I think your rhetorical questioning misses a major point.
You presume that these gayLeft groups exist to actually advance pro-gay public policy and that their success depends on securing those public policy achievements.
I think gayLeft groups like HRC exist to feather their own caps and are in the public policy arena to solicit funds for their own use –and not to necessarily advance public policy, but to advocate on behalf of public policy goals and dreams that can be sold as a platform to solicit contributions to their organization(s).
It’s the agitation and solicitation that drives their efforts, not a lofty public policy goal to, say, extend gay civil rights.
Granted, they have to appear to be interested in advancing pro-gay policy A, B, or C… but there’s more for them in allowing those issues to linger (job security, for one) and fester and jiggle about than in actually engaging in a coordinated effort to secure passage.
There wasn’t a plan for 111th; there won’t be one for the 112th.
That’s because the main purpose of these groups is to agitate for change, advocate for progress… and if they get it because of dumb luck, crow like crazy, find another issue and restart the money machine.
My thoughts on DADT.
In order to know whether or not the repeal is a good idea (a totally different question than whether or not DADT is constitutional), the following questions must be answered.
1. Will the military be able to handle the sexual dynamics between openly gay servicemen and others, especially when they are billeted in close quarters?
2. How did the military handle the sexual dynamics of integrating women into the armed forces, especially when servicemen had to be billeted in close quarters? Did the sexual dynamics reduce the effectiveness of our armed forces?
There has been so much misleading reportage about DADT in recent weeks, I feel obliged to post this essay here:
http://colorfulconservative.blogspot.com/2010/11/cocky-writers-for-nation-totally-dont.html
Michael Ejercito, my answers to your question:
1. No, the military will not be able to handle that.
2. The military handled integrating women by degrading the standards for physical fitness and making everyone subject to paranoid fraternization rules that don’t make any sense. Yes the sexual dynamics have wrought havoc on the armed forces.
Lastly, gay people don’t want to see what will happen to gay military people after DADT is repealed. Gays in uniform will have their privacy stripped away and when they get targeted and raped under stress situations, they will have no way to get out. I am sure the gay groups will be nowhere to be found on those lonely nights.
Repealing DADT is the unwisest, most fallacious political campaign I’ve seen in my lifetime. Virtually nobody who is gay and has had to serve in the high-stress combat situation facing enlisted soldiers has been part of the discussion. All you hear about are people with rarified life stories and lots of blathering stentors who will never be in that situation.
Sorry to be so blunt.
They have the same approach they always did.
1. Blame Republicans for everything.
2. Defend Obama Party members regardless of what they do.
3. Demand more money from gays to reward #2 and attack #1.
I repeat what I’ve written elsewhere (on a site relentlessly attacking Republicans over some lunatic advocating violence or something–but it applies here too):
==========
This is ridiculous. Partisanship blinds us.
I have news: Both sides have fascist wings. You cannot say “Democrats never do this” or “the left never stooped so low”–and as a victim of discrimination from left politicians, I can personally attest that fascism is alive and well on *both* sides.
Many decent Republicans *have* commented, from religious groups to policy think tanks (one in Utah just wrote on the benefits of immigration) to business groups–the chamber of commerce’s head’s grandfather was an immigrant, and he’s spoken out about nativism.
problem is the media only cares about us-versu-them wars between powerful factions, and will search out, seek, and encourage those factions (they’re all going bankrupt at the moment, so they’re desperate).
You have the fascist right, the fascist left, right, left, center-right and center-left. I happen to be a center-right person.
It’s important to understand there isn’t much difference between fascist lefties and fascist righties–they simply argue over which morals and traditions the state shall enforce.
Right and left people are also not that different; in my experience there’s the same proportion of intolerant, bigoted people (denying quality education to excluded groups–yours truly included–is hardly a mark of tolerance for lefties). *They also have an equal proportion of tolerant, good people*.
Then there’s the center. Center-right and center-left people vehemently disagree; we also tend to love all people, everywhere, with a burning desire for everyone to live together in peace and harmony (with varying degrees of economic freedom–a major source of disagreement) and we generally think compromise is always a good thing.
We also hate fascism, and political groups that slide into fascism. The slide always begins with forming a groupthink; a doctrine that everyone “knows” to be true, then deciding all of society must join the groupthink and think like they do.