Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Gay critics say 'too little, too late' from Obama


BigMike619

Recommended Posts

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/17/obama.gay.critics/index.html

(CNN) -- President Obama's decision to grant some benefits to the same-sex partners of federal employees is seen by some as his attempt to extend an olive branch to the gay and lesbian community, but critics say it's "too little, too late."

"It seems to me at least to be a nice gesture, but a disappointment," said Richard Kim, a senior editor at The Nation magazine.

The memorandum Obama is signing Thursday is not expected to grant health and retirement benefits to same-sex partners, as that is prohibited under the Defense of Marriage Act.

"It will absolutely be seen as something good -- but I think, for example, it not including full health insurance -- that is going to put a real microscope on that question. You know, why not?," Kim said, adding that memo applies only to federal employees, so most people will not be affected by it.

Charles Moran, the spokesman for the Log Cabin Republicans said the lack of full benefits in Thursday's memorandum shows a lack of commitment to the gay community.

"That's the part that just shows that the Obama administration really isn't serious about their promises to the gay and lesbian community. Things like the health benefits, things like retirement benefits and coverage for spouses. These are the core issues," Moran said.

"Why start the marathon if you're not serious about ending the race?" he added.

Moran said Obama has had multiple opportunities to fulfill his promises to the gay and lesbian community -- including by repealing the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy and standing against the Justice Department motion filed last week in support of the Defense of Marriage Act.

"Here we are, several months after he's been inaugurated, and we've gotten basically nothing. So it is too little, too late," Moran said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is where I think Obama has a real problem.

He really does want to please everyone. Seems like he wants universal popularity instead of doing the right thing here. The right thing would be to grant all benefits to same sex couples.

The safe and easy way is to give them some but not all so that he keeps the Republicans and social conservatives somewhat happy.

How may times is he going to take that safe and easy route?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is where I think Obama has a real problem.

He really does want to please everyone. Seems like he wants universal popularity instead of doing the right thing here. The right thing would be to grant all benefits to same sex couples.

The safe and easy way is to give them some but not all so that he keeps the Republicans and social conservatives somewhat happy.

How may times is he going to take that safe and easy route?

I think you are totally wrong. I think Obama genuinly thinks Gay folks should have equality under the law, and that stupid, backwards, and discriminatory policies against gay marrage, gays in the military, and denying gays insurance should be reversed...

But Obama has priorities. He's not going to spend all his political capital on gays, when he needs to keep his powder dry for healthcare reform, restructuing the defense budget, and changing the nations energy policy. Bill Clinton made that mistake. If I've taken anything away from watching Obama over the last four months it's not that he wants to please everybody.. It's that he's a pragmatist, and he's got priorites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add fuel to the fire, because I am a jerk :)

White House admits Obama "benefits" speech simply political ploy, plan still being created after it was already announced

by John Aravosis (DC) on 6/17/2009 12:48:00 AM

A rather blockbuster NYT story in tomorrow's paper about Obama's ploy to win back the gays by offering some federal employees some benefits (but not all, including no health coverage).

The White House actually admitted to the NYT that they were offering the benefits to help contain the "growing furor among gay rights groups." How about doing it because it's the right thing to do? How about doing it because you were already planning to do it to help our community, because you recognize us as human beings? We kept being told, fret not, we have a secret plan for your civil rights - now it seems, not so much:

But administration officials said the timing of the announcement was intended to help contain the growing furor among gay rights groups. Several gay donors withdrew their sponsorship of a Democratic National Committee fund-raising event next week, where Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. is scheduled to speak.

Just as bad, it seems they came up with this proposal on the fly. In spite of the fact that for a while they've been hinting that they'd do this, the NYT discovered that the details of the "plan" haven't even been decided, yet the White House is already announcing it publicly.

The breadth and scope of the memorandum to be signed by Mr. Obama was being completed Tuesday evening, said administration officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid upstaging the president’s announcement on Wednesday.

With all due respect, don't our civil rights deserve a bit more attention than some kluge thrown together at the last minute to save a ****tail party?

This is simply more evidence that the White House never had a plan to act on our civil rights, to act on the president's promises (none of which have been fulfilled, or even addressed). They're simply winging it with our rights.

(Pam Spaulding observes that it's "amateur hour" at the White House.)

http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/white-house-admits-o...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Here we are, several months after he's been inaugurated, and we've gotten basically nothing. So it is too little, too late," Moran said.

no offense, but obama's has some things *slightly* more important to deal with. even though i personally agree with granting insurance benefits, etc to gay partners, i'd be pissed as hell if obama took his eye off the economic ball to spend time and political capital getting those rights for the gay community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"That's the part that just shows that the Obama administration really isn't serious about their promises to the gay and lesbian community. Things like the health benefits, things like retirement benefits and coverage for spouses. These are the core issues," Moran said.

I find it hard for the fed to compel States to recognize benefits for homosexuals. This is mixed situation to me. The majority of States do not recognize same sex marriages. How can the fed give benefits to federal workers, and the states these workers are in may or may not recognize their union. I feel Moran, and people like hime need to get things passed on a state level, so everyone is on one level. That way these provision aren't necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't blame them. You would think something as simple as equal rights under the law would be corrected by now.

But you know every other minority has characeristics that can make them prone to inequities. Gays don't have the same issues, unless they tell some one. Shoot I have a fetish for women legs. Nobody knows unless I tell some one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't blame them. You would think something as simple as equal rights under the law would be corrected by now.

I do blame them for acting like 3 year olds when they should have known damn well that Obama wasn't going to make gay rights a priority in his administration. To be honest, such rhetoric isn't going to help their cause much, particularly when the Dems are really the only party who are open to supporting their cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do blame them for acting like 3 year olds when they should have known damn well that Obama wasn't going to make gay rights a priority in his administration. To be honest, such rhetoric isn't going to help their cause much, particularly when the Dems are really the only party who are open to supporting their cause.

so theyre acting like 3 year olds when obama said he would do something, he didnt and they call him out on it?

and now that theyve called him out on it you think it is going to make it hard on them?

wow...that doesnt even come close to sounding right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is where I think Obama has a real problem.

He really does want to please everyone. Seems like he wants universal popularity instead of doing the right thing here. The right thing would be to grant all benefits to same sex couples.

I'd disagree.

IMO Right Thing #1 would be to get rid of the Federal laws that say that the Feds won't recognize gay couples even if their state does. Make the Feds neutral on the subject.

IMO, Right Thing #2 would be for the Supreme Court to rule that yes, the 14th Amendment applies to all citizens and all discrimination, not just racial discrimination. (But frankly, that ain't happening any time soon. Not with the yahoos that are in there, now.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd disagree.

IMO Right Thing #1 would be to get rid of the Federal laws that say that the Feds won't recognize gay couples even if their state does. Make the Feds neutral on the subject.

IMO, Right Thing #2 would be for the Supreme Court to rule that yes, the 14th Amendment applies to all citizens and all discrimination, not just racial discrimination. (But frankly, that ain't happening any time soon. Not with the yahoos that are in there, now.)

And Obama doesn't have the power to do anything about either of those things. I think Obama would LIKE the fed to be neutral on the subject of gay marriage, but that's a legislative thing.

As for the Supreme Court, good luck with that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Obama doesn't have the power to do anything about either of those things. I think Obama would LIKE the fed to be neutral on the subject of gay marriage, but that's a legislative thing.

As for the Supreme Court, good luck with that...

He does have power on DADT and the language his DOJ uses in legal filings and briefs

That is what has the gay community in an uproar right now (in particular the DOMA filings last week and the language used)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He does have power on DADT and the language his DOJ uses in legal filings and briefs

That is what has the gay community in an uproar right now (in particular the DOMA filings last week and the language used)

Do you have some links to info on those things? This is the first I've heard about either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...