Gay Patriot Header Image

Some gay Dems are just a little too eager to be loved by Obama

All too many left-of-center gays have long had a crush on Barack Obama because of that (D) after his name.  And they’ve just been looking for a reason to justify their love.

And in the past twenty-four hours, our gay peers have been exulting all over Facebook how wonderful Obama is while the heads of various gay organizations call the moment historic.  “Where Were You When Obama Made History?” gushes the National Center for Lesbian Rights Kate Kendell:

Where were you when you first heard?

I was in front of Lincoln Center (I’m in New York City this week for a meeting with other LGBT civil rights attorneys from across the country) when NCLR Deputy Director Arcelia Hurtado screamed, “He did it!”

I turned around and said, “What?” To which she replied, “Obama came out in support of marriage!” We both screamed and hugged, teary eyed. The New Yorkers walking past us didn’t care. But we knew that this was a historic and indelible moment.

At the end of her e-mail and blog post, Kate helpfully includes a button encouraging people to Donate to her outfit. A couple years back, she used her 9/11 letter to rant against right-wingers.

History?  History?  All we get is a man making a statement.  And despite the office he holds, he is putting forward no actual policies that might effect real change.  These people are just so googly-eyed about empty words from a man who specializes in such rhetoric.  Guess that’s the way it is when your schoolgirl crush blows you a kiss.

Some folks just seem to need validation from the government.  And alas, sometimes it seems that’s what the gay marriage movement is all about.  (Yet, through the writings of Jonathan Rauch as well as from the experiences of myriad gay couples, we know it’s about more than just a piece of paper or an anodyne word from a pandering politician.)

More tolerance for gay marriage proponents among gay marriage opponents (than vice versa)?

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 6:40 pm - May 10, 2012.
Filed under: Academia,Civil Discourse,Gay Marriage,Random Thoughts

Surveying the returns on North Carolina’s Amendment One, William Kristol finds that the measure was soundly defeated in two counties with large universities by margins of “5 to 1 and 5 to 2, respectively”, yet passed by margins of 2 to 1 in neighboring “counties like Alamance, Person, and Granville”.

This causes him to “bet there’s more tolerance in Alamance, Person and Granville for those who are proponents of gay marriage than there is at Duke or UNC-Chapel Hill for the opponents.

I’d made the same wager.  Here’s one piece of evidence that suggests the odds on this wager are better than even.

Will Obama’s gay marriage pander hurt him politically?

Interesting how today, both gay conservatives and leftists see through President Obama’s pander yesterday on gay marriage, coming as it did following a week when the Democrats was facing questions for his stand on gay marriage.

The president may claim that Vice President Biden’s recent comments on gay marriage forced the timing of the announcement, but the real question is why he didn’t announce his change of heart when it could have made a difference, especially given, as Ed Morrissey reports that, in his interview yesterday, Obama claimed “he’d made up his mind to change his position some time ago“:

And for all of those who cheered this flip-flop, here’s a question: wouldn’t it have been more effective in North Carolina had Obama made this announcement before Amendment One went to the polls?  According to Obama himself, he’d already changed position on same-sex marriage.  An announcement last week or the week before that, with a personal plea to African-American voters, might have made a difference.  Instead, Obama hid, the White House fibbed, and Amendment One won easily in a state that Obama carried in 2008.  Regardless of whatever else this might be called, leadership isn’t among the terms that come to mind.

Ad the Yahoo! online survey indicates, it does seem most people see through the president’s pandering move, with more than two-thirds of respondents saying they see his policy shift as based on campaign politics.

This may help rally the base and generate some more campaign cash, but could well end up being a net negative for the president, not on the merits of the issue, but on his approach.  Expect more people to realize Obama is just another politician for whom political calculation matters more than principle.

UPDATE:   Seems Obama consulted his political advisors to reach the decision he announced yesterday: (more…)

Gay marriage more popular than Obama

Maybe Obama’s shift on gay marriage was about more than money.  On our Facebook page, our reader Chad wondered if President Obama “decided to come out in favor of SSM now because he knows it’s more popular than he is.”  He’s got a point.

Today’s Gallup tracking point shows the president’s approval has edged up to 48:

And the latest Gallup poll shows 50% of Americans think gay marriages should be recognized as valid by the law: (more…)

Beowulf responds to WaPo hit piece on Romney’s youthful indiscretions

When, in the greatest poem written between the publication of Virgil’s Aeneid and Dante’s Divine Comedy, the wormy Unferth reminds Beowulf of his youthful braggadocio, the eponymous hero questions his accuser’s sobriety, noting that he an his friend Breca made those errors of judgment, “being but boys in our time of youth” (my translation).

Playing Unferth’s part, the Washington Post, Ed Morrissey reports, “Despite demonstrating zero curiosity over Barack Obama’s college transcripts to check on just how brilliant the academic actually was, the Post now has a big expose on Mitt Romney’s high school career as … a practical joker“.  And following the great Geatish hero’s lead, Romney has apologized, acknowledging his youth: “Back in high school,” he said in a radio interview, “I did some dumb things, and if anybody was hurt by that or offended, obviously I apologize for that” (via Ed).

Asking if  “a decades old high school story is really ‘news’,” Jennifer Rubin offers:

When long investigative pieces on Obama’s last three years (i.e. his presidency) start appearing on the front pages of newspapers, maybe the press has justification for going back decades to explore his opponent’s childhood. But so long as gobs of potential, substantive stories on Obama go unreported, you have to wonder why time and resources are spent on his opponent’s high school years. No wonder conservatives are suspicion of mainstream media.


Just as Beowulf questioned Unferth’s competence to ask question questions, so do we wonder at the Post’s competence to cover presidential elections in an even-handed manner.

UPDATE:  Jim Geraghty wonders about the absence of comparable Post coverage on Obama’s youthful indiscretions: (more…)

Obama hauls in campaign cash from trusting gays

Barack Obama knows how to play gay Democrats like a fiddle.  They’re just so eager to embrace the Democratic Party that one shout out, one wink, one nod is all it takes for them to think he loves them.  They’re so smitten with the captain of the football team that he knows all he needs do to earn their affection is to make it appear that they might have a chance with him.

But, as I wrote nearly a year ago, face it, guys and gals, “he’s just after you for your money.”

Over at the Washington Free Beacon, the staff take note of an interesting coincidence:

President Obama announced his support for same-sex marriage less [sic] than 48 hours after the Washington Post reported that prominent political donors were threatening to withhold donations over the president’s position on gay rights. . . .

Left-wing blogger Greg Sargent reported on Monday that “leading gay and progressive donors” were angry with Obama over his increasingly convoluted position on gay rights and same-sex marriage, and were refusing to donate any more money to Priorities USA, the pro-Obama Super PAC.

Emphasis added.  And sure enough, just after he blows a kiss in their direction, gay Democrats are back to swooning.  According to Zeke Miller on BuzzFeed, “in the first 90 minutes after the news broke Wednesday, the campaign received $1 million in spontaneous contributions” (via Joshuapundit).

And all this for a kiss.  And there’s still no ring in sight.  No indication what the president’s change of heart will change in the legislative/policy sphere.

When they had a majority, House Democrats never voted on repealing DOMA, yet now they’re campaigning on Obama’s support of same-sex marriage

On its website, The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) bills itself as “the official campaign arm of the Democrats in the House.”  And last night via a friend’s Facebook link, I learned that this outfit was garnering signatures in support of the president’s new stand on gay marriage:

That takes some cheek. Since a Republican Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in 1996, Democrats have controlled the House for four years, from January 3, 2007 until January 5, 2011.  Not once did then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) hold a vote on repealing that legislation.  Not once did she hold a vote on giving benefits to the same-sex domestic partners of federal employees.

These Democrats now praise Obama’s support of same-sex marriage, yet, when they had a chance to act on the issue they did nothing.

Something tells me that once the DCCC gets your name, they’re going to be hitting you up for campaign contributions.  Maybe this thing is all about fundraising after all.

Obama won’t show us any legislation on gay marriage:
(still gay Democrats are giddy about his words on gay marriage)

At 0:49 below, Audrey Hepburn demonstrates how gay Americans should have responded to President Obama’s statement on gay marriage yesterday:

Like everything with Obama, all we get is “words, words, words.”

This is not just a gay conservative talking.  Several voices on the left have found that there’s not much there there in the president’s sudden shift on same-sex marriage.  At the Gawker, John Cook calls the statement a “cowardly cop-out”:  “it seems fairly clear from the network’s coverage that his announcement amounts to much less than meets the eye. He now believes that gay couples should be able to marry.

At the far left magazine Mother Jones, Adam Serwer reports that his colleague . . .

. . . David Corn spoke with an administration source and asked whether the president recognized gay marriage as a right. The official replied, “He has always said that it is a state issue, and he’s not suggesting changing that. He did not support the North Carolina amendment, but he’s not saying he will bring up a piece of federal legislation on gay marriage. This is how he feels himself about the issue, and he leaves it to the states.”

Emphasis added.  He’s not bringing up legislation?!?  And all my left-leaning gay friends on Facebook are so giddy about the statement; Obama’s just leaving it to the states.

Shouldn’t they be insisting that he show us he loves us by putting some political capital on the line and backing legislation to make federal recognition of gay relationships a reality?

He’s like the guy who tells his beloved how much he loves her, tells her wants to get married, but refuses to buy a ring or set a date.

Log Cabin rebukes Obama on gay marriage statement

R. Clarke Cooper, Log Cabin Executive Director has not joined the heads of other D.C.-based gay organizations in praising the president for putting forward the same position yesterday as Dick Cheney offered twelve years ago:

Log Cabin Republicans appreciate that President Obama has finally come in line with leaders like Vice President Dick Cheney on this issue, but LGBT Americans are right to be angry that this calculated announcement comes too late to be of any use to the people of North Carolina, or any of the other states that have addressed this issue on his watch. This administration has manipulated LGBT families for political gain as much as anybody, and after his campaign’s ridiculous contortions to deny support for marriage equality this week he does not deserve praise for an announcement that comes a day late and a dollar short.

Some gay leaders see this move for what it is, a “calculated announcement” following “his campaign’s ridiculous contortions.”  Kudos, Clarke for your solid statment. Something’s changed at Log Cabin.  Wonder why that could be.