No Good Deed Goes Unpunished, Obama Edition

So Obama makes an “It Gets Better” video, and the reaction among our progressive betters is to debate whether or not he is history’s greatest monster.

Really, read the comments to this D-Day post. These people deserve a Republican House and Senate.

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit

315 replies
  1. 1
    zzyzx says:

    I especially liked:

    And thousands of hockymoms helping in soup kitchens (as long as the really stinky and nasty homeless people don’t get too close)

    Yeah, let the homeless starve if the volunteers aren’t going to be pure enough in their motives!

  2. 2
    Dr. Squid says:

    Posted somewhere else:

    My daughter is 2. Yesterday, she wanted juice. She screamed when I didn’t get up immediately. She screamed when after I did get up to get it, I didn’t allow her past the gate into the kitchen. And then she screamed after I did get it for her and sat back down. So to recap, she wanted it now, she wanted it to be gotten her way, and when it wasn’t fast enough, she screamed anyway.

    Flibberin’ jimjam! She’s a firebagger!

    This video the President shot won’t be good enough for the emus.

  3. 3
    stuckinred says:

    The firebaggers are bitching that he won’t do anything about Clarence Thomas!

  4. 4
    ruemara says:

    I expected that. Just let it go, Cole, let it go. Cue 300+ posts on the endless “Obama, homophobe, incompetent or misunderstood” debate.

  5. 5
    Jules says:

    God.
    The stupid and the butthurt will never end with those folks.

    YouTube comments are made of fail too.

  6. 6
    me says:

    Really, read the comments to this D-Day post.

    Head like a hole.

  7. 7
    shecky says:

    Like Dan Choi, pledging to not vote for Obama… because President Palin will be such an advocate for gay rights.

  8. 8
    Davis X. Machina says:

    @stuckinred: I mean, what’s the point of having a black president if he won’t pop a cap in somebody’s ass now and then? Might as well have voted for Bill Bradley.

  9. 9
    bogart says:

    What does this guy have to do to get an “atta-boy?”

    Oh, that’s right. Do exactly what we hated about Bush and legislate from the Oval Office by fiat.

  10. 10
    steviez314 says:

    Don’t you wish Rahm made an “It gets better” video too?

    THOSE comments should be awesome.

  11. 11
    mistermix says:

    I was looking for Dick Cheney’s “it gets better” video, can someone post a link?

  12. 12
    soonergrunt says:

    @stuckinred: What the fuck do those dipshits think he’s supposed to do?
    I swear to Dog, these stupid motherfuckers are as bad as the teabaggers.

  13. 13
    Short Bus Bully says:

    No one deserves a Republican House and Senate, even the 27%. Just remember to keep things in perspective and take the long view. Obama does and that’s why he’ll be on Rushmore someday.

    /Obot

  14. 14
    Trinity says:

    He ain’t perfect but I’m still damn glad that he’s our President.

    F the Firebaggers.

  15. 15
    joeyess says:

    I read Digby’s blog everyday. I find her to be knowledgeable and her summaries are for the most part, spot on. She’s also a bit of a Pollyanna.

    Her commenters? Simply Pollyanna.

    Clarification: D-Day sometimes writes on Digby’s blog and she frequently links to D-Day. I consider them compatriots.

  16. 16
    trollhattan says:

    Yeesh. They may deserve Preznit Palin but I sure don’t. Who are these folks, solar teabaggers?

  17. 17
    Shade Tail says:

    @bogart (#9):

    Oh man, have you hit the nail on the head. All I have to say is that I’m glad Obama isn’t politicizing the law the way Bush and Gonzales did, and the bile roars up like a geyser. It’s not so bad here at BJ, but definitely elsewhere.

  18. 18
    Hurling Dervish says:

    I wonder why no conservatives have made an It Gets Better video yet. It’s almost like they want gays to commit suicide or something.

  19. 19

    Really, read the comments to this D-Day post.

    Jesus H. Krispy Kreme! What a shower of oxygen thieves they are at FDL these days.

    The bonus part of it is that I’ve finally come to a realisation – Rush Limbaugh et al are firebaggers. No, wait, here me out. Whenever Rush and his minions speak about liberals, all we hear are epithets about being whiny, weak, prone to talk instead of action, ineffectual, and generally stupid.

    What does that have to do with anyone here? Nothing, but that description fits the firebagger crowd to a t; it makes perfect sense if you think Limabugh and others are getting their entire view of liberals from one place.

  20. 20
    soonergrunt says:

    @shecky: Well, Choi was only a Lieutenant when he got out. That explains quite a bit right there.

  21. 21
    Anya says:

    @mistermix: Come on, don’t give him any ideas. He might do it just to fuck with us.

  22. 22
    bryanD says:

    Why cum when I pause Barry’s vidjo to make him look evil, he jus cumz out lookin retarded? Why?

  23. 23
    Davis X. Machina says:

    If I was Obama, and I was vested — and maybe the president vests on the day he is sworn in, Presidential pensions aren’t ordinary pensions, I’m sure — at this point I’d have already reached the “Fuck it, Biden. You do it.” stage. He’s got friends in Hawai’i, it’s not like there’s no place nice for him to go.

    Overdeveloped sense of duty, that man.

  24. 24
    slag says:

    Really, read the comments to this D-Day post.

    Not gonna.

    But good on him. The quest for equality is a multi-front effort in this country, and the culture front is certainly a valid one for the president to take on. I, for one, would like to see all of our lawmakers take the issue on more strongly from the lawmaking front as well but it’s a process. A really, really long and seemingly nonsensical process.

  25. 25
    Bnut says:

    @mistermix:
    The video of him giving his “it gets better” thing to the beleaguered stormtroopers of the Galaxy was deleted from YouTube.

  26. 26
    themann1086 says:

    @mistermix: What about McCain’s? Bush’s? Palin’s?

    This is a Big F’ing Deal. His screw-ups related to DADT aside, the President took the time to make a video telling our gay kids that It Gets Better, and that they aren’t alone. Mad props to Savage for making this project, and props to the President for participating.

  27. 27
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @bogart: But, but, but it is different if ruling by fiat gets me what I want.

  28. 28
    R-Jud says:

    @soonergrunt:

    Well, Choi was only a Lieutenant when he got out. That explains quite a bit right there.

    Meow!

  29. 29
    NonyNony says:

    Really, read the comments to this D-Day post

    Um, no?

    Sorry John, you couldn’t pay me enough to wade through the shitstorm of outraged liberal commenters mixed with fake liberal troll commenters doing their best to egg on the liberal outrage. If I wanted to waste my time in a giant circle jerk like that I’d go read the comments on my local newspaper’s website. Or a random YouTube video.

  30. 30
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @soonergrunt: So was I, so watch it, Okie.

  31. 31

    The comments on Dan Savage’s blog are more measured. The occasional “Talk – Action = Shit”, but most seem to recognize this as the big deal it is.

    Heartening to see a couple posters note that, their frustrations aside, he’s still the biggest and most open advocate of LGBT citizens to ever occupy the White House.

    http://slog.thestranger.com/sl.....rack-obama

  32. 32
    Jewish Steel says:

    As a political position cynicism/irrational pessimism has the illusion of sounding well informed and thoughtful to all who are even slightly less informed than those who profess it.

    Obama blowback was inevitable from the faint of heart who cannot bear to look at the sausage-making and horse trading aspects of legislation. And for folks who’s knowledge of history doesn’t extend back any further than the 2000s.

    But Jesus! What a bunch of whiners. They deserve worse than a Republican majorities.

  33. 33
    Mojotron says:

    I don’t know why I find this “criticism” as funny as I do:

    Maybe I’m too critical of him, but a couple of his lines stand out to me.
    “There are people out there who love you and care about you just the way you are.” – not an assumption you should make, some of us (gay or not) did not have someone like that.

    At some point you’re just trying to be offended. “There are people out there who love you and care about you just the way you are”- Oh yeah? that’s what you think!

  34. 34

    I thought that Obama’s video was beautiful.

    So I’m not going to link to any asshole saying otherwise. Why should I let them spoil the moment?

    If you can find out who you are and be loyal to that person, you can find satisfaction that nobody and nothing can take away from you.

    It’s not the fitting in that brings contentment. It is you accepting and being true to you.

  35. 35
    suzanne says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: It saddens me knowing that some people who I otherwise like and respect appear to feel that way.

    In other news, the house across the street from me is getting a new roof. So workers are ripping off all of the Spanish tiles and dropping them into a metal dumptruck parked in the driveway. It’s a two-story house. It sounds like Armageddon, and my dog is losing her mind. Hell, ***I*** am losing my mind. They started at 8:30 am. I don’t know how I’m going to deal with this today.

  36. 36
    kd bart says:

    “These people deserve a Republican House and Senate.”

    Are you kidding? These people want a Republican House and Senate because it makes it so much easier to whine about everything.

  37. 37
  38. 38
    Lolis says:

    Anyone know why when Choi was re-instated maybe six months ago he ended up not going back in? Then I kept hearing about him chaining himself to the WH and read that he had been honorably discharged. I am assuming that was his choice. Anyone know the full story on this?

  39. 39
    Admiral_Komack says:

    “So Obama makes an “It Gets Better” video, and the reaction among our progressive betters is to debate whether or not he is history’s greatest monster.”

    -The “progressive betters” can kiss my ass.

  40. 40
    BTD says:

    A post about a comment thread at another blog? Really?

  41. 41
    AB says:

    yeah but, like, I don’t deserve a republican house and senate so…

    anyway, I can’t really imagine what it’s like to be gay and what people go through so maybe someone can inform me… do these videos actually have an impact on the people it’s meant to have an impact on (ie: younger people at risk of suicide)?

  42. 42
    Culture of Truth says:

    Well, sure. Everything is viewed throught the prism of Betrayal now. So he could do exactly what some people want, and they would still see it throught that lens.

    ‘That sneaky Obama, making a positive video to cover for his anti-gay assassination program!’ (I’m paraphrasing, I’m not going to wade through those comments.)

  43. 43
    Len says:

    Good for President Obama! For the life of me I cannot imagine John McCain or Sarah Palin ever doing one of these.

    Are we absolutely sure those folks over at FDL are even Democrats?

  44. 44
    Loneoak says:

    The worst thing that ever happened was the President speaking directly to a beleaguered group of teenagers and encouraging them not to kill themselves.

  45. 45
    Cat Lady says:

    @suzanne:

    Find your inner firebagger and blame Obama.

  46. 46
    Comrade Javamanphil says:

    Meanwhile, GOP candidates for the House and Senate (Yes, I’m looking at you Angle) are advocating armed rebellion. Way to keep your eye on the ball, firebaggers.

  47. 47
    Cat says:

    ZOMG!!! A few hundred people posted some stupid shit in comments about a Video!

    Quick! Make a front page post!

  48. 48
    Frank Chow says:

    *Headslamondesk – this is why we don’t get nice things!

  49. 49
    Nellcote says:

    The firebaggers can’t even focus enough to get Russ Finegold re elected. Their base power does not impress.

  50. 50
    Steve says:

    Who cares? It’s easy to imagine Bush making the exact same video. And have I mentioned lately that Obama is to Dick Cheney’s right on gay marriage?

  51. 51
    soonergrunt says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: You got better. One presumes with more time, so will Lt. Choi.

  52. 52
    Oscar Leroy says:

    the reaction among our progressive betters is to debate whether or not he is history’s greatest monster

    Just a sli-i-i-ight exaggeration there.

    Gay Americans are ticked at Obama because he not only hasn’t done squat for them, but he enjoys thumbing his nose at them as well. That is why they are mad. “Do something about it, don’t just talk” is a valid reaction.

  53. 53
    suzanne says:

    @Cat Lady:

    Find your inner firebagger and blame Obama.

    I’m about to find my inner Sharron Angle and pursue some Second Amendment remedies.

  54. 54
    Ed Marshall says:

    @Mojotron:

    I find it funny because I’m cruel enough to think “You are right, no one likes you because you are a whiny whimshit”.

  55. 55
    Cat says:

    @Mojotron:

    I don’t know why I find this “criticism” as funny as I do:
    ___
    Maybe I’m too critical of him, but a couple of his lines stand out to me.
    ___
    “There are people out there who love you and care about you just the way you are.” – not an assumption you should make, some of us (gay or not) did not have someone like that.
    ___
    At some point you’re just trying to be offended. “There are people out there who love you and care about you just the way you are”- Oh yeah? that’s what you think!

    Your lack of empathy is truly disgusting. Many people at different points in their lives will feel this way.

    Instead of seeing someone who could be suffering from depression and social isolation you see someone whose just ‘trying to be offended’ and think its funny.

  56. 56
    soonergrunt says:

    @Mojotron:

    At some point you’re just trying to be offended.

    DING DING DING! WE HAVE A WINNER!

  57. 57
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @bogart:

    What does this guy have to do to get an “atta-boy?” Oh, that’s right. Do exactly what we hated about Bush and legislate from the Oval Office by fiat.

    That’s just stupid. It is perfectly Constitutional for him to sign a stop-loss order ending discharges from Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. There would be NOTHING illegal or unethical about that. It would also be perfectly legal for him to tell his Department of Justice not to defend DADT in court. In case you haven’t heard, courts are allowed to declare a law unconstitutional.

  58. 58
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Cat:

    Your lack of empathy is truly disgusting. Many people at different points in their lives will feel this way.

    Something I have learned through years of therapy and medication: the way you feel is not necessarily reality.

  59. 59
    Oscar Leroy says:

    What the fuck do those dipshits think he’s supposed to do?

    See above.

  60. 60
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    It is perfectly Constitutional for him to sign a stop-loss order ending discharges from Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.

    No, it isn’t, as has been explained to you by actual lawyers about 20,000 times before, but you just keep pushing the same bullshit line.

  61. 61
    Jules says:

    BTW, Reason haz a sad that DougJ wrote Lawn Jockey yesterday.

  62. 62
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Steve:

    And have I mentioned lately that Obama is to Dick Cheney’s right on gay marriage?

    I’m sorry, but that isn’t allowed on this site. Obama made a nice video with some nice words. That’s all his supporters deserve, so sit down and like it.

  63. 63
    Cat says:

    @Ed Marshall:

    I find it funny because I’m cruel enough to think “You are right, no one likes you because you are a whiny whimshit”.

    Ah, the internets is a buzz with the electricity as two psychopaths meet for the first time and discover they have a common interest…

  64. 64
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    You have no idea what a stop-loss order is, don’t you?

    And not one lawyer has explained anything here.

  65. 65
    fourlegsgood says:

    Firedoglake sucks ass. the end.

  66. 66
    Cat says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Something I have learned through years of therapy and medication: the way you feel is not necessarily reality.

    And so that means you should be held up for public ridicule?

  67. 67
    Anya says:

    @Jules: Even better, DougJ gets the Moore Award.

  68. 68
    Ed Marshall says:

    @Cat:

    I’m truly history’s greatest monster if I don’t have an outpouring of sympathy for a whiny ass firebagger who no one likes for obvious fucking reasons.

  69. 69
    Bubblegum Tate says:

    read the comments to this D-Day post.

    What the fuck is wrong with those people?

  70. 70
    Anya says:

    @Oscar Leroy: It’s insignificant that Cheney was a leader of a party that frequently demonizes gays and uses them to drive bigots to the polls. But hey, let’s applaud his support for gay marriage, after he left office.

  71. 71
    John S. says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    The “I reject your reality and substitute my own” tag isn’t just for Republicans.

  72. 72
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Cat:

    And so that means you should be held up for public ridicule?

    I’m sorry, but you do remember that we’re talking about an anonymous commenter on the internet who’s upset because the president dared to say that there are people who love him/her as s/he is, right? How much “public ridicule” are we realistically talking about here?

    If the worst thing you can say about Obama’s message is, “No, he’s wrong, people don’t really love me the way I am!” that says a whole lot more about the listener than the message.

  73. 73
    Maude says:

    @Mnemosyne:
    We haz a troll. # 60

  74. 74
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Anya:

    Associated Press, 8/25/2004 10:51:00 AM ET

    DAVENPORT, Iowa — Vice President Dick Cheney, whose daughter Mary is a lesbian, drew criticism from both proponents and foes of gay marriage Tuesday after he distanced himself from President Bush’s call for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.

    At a campaign rally in this Mississippi River town, Cheney spoke supportively about gay relationships, saying “freedom means freedom for everyone,” when asked about his stand on gay marriage.

    “Lynne and I have a gay daughter, so it’s an issue our family is very familiar with,” Cheney told an audience that included his daughter. “With the respect to the question of relationships, my general view is freedom means freedom for everyone. … People ought to be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to.

  75. 75
    gene108 says:

    I read those posts on FDL. I guess, if the FDL’ers get the liberals they want in Congress, they’ll also impeach Obama…just like the teabaggers…

  76. 76
    Culture of Truth says:

    but he enjoys thumbing his nose at them as well

    No exaggeration there, at all!

  77. 77
    Glenndacious Greenwaldian (formerly tim) says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    That’s just stupid. It is perfectly Constitutional for him to sign a stop-loss order ending discharges from Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. There would be NOTHING illegal or unethical about that. It would also be perfectly legal for him to tell his Department of Justice not to defend DADT in court. In case you haven’t heard, courts are allowed to declare a law unconstitutional.

    Don’t even bother trying to inject some variation of thought here, my friend; this thread is an especially intense example of our old friend the BJ Circle Jerk.

    I suppose it’s better than nothing that O participated in this project, but any gay kid with an internet connection can quickly determine that he is yet another hypocrite and liar, talking out both sides of his mouth; and that when it comes to action, not words regarding gay issues as well as many others, Obama is a fail.

  78. 78
    slag says:

    @Anya: Haha! It’s no surprise that Sullivan is unfamiliar with the snark in these parts. The war on sarcasm carries on.

  79. 79
  80. 80
    Chuck says:

    When the one – relatively – sober commenter, ApacheTrout, waded into the thread, s/he was told to “get bent” by another commenter, cbl2. Cbl2 is apparently (and embarrassingly) unaware that “bent” is a common gay slur.

  81. 81
    nevsky42 says:

    @Dr. Squid:

    Hee. Reminds me of a conversation with my three-year-old as I was putting croutons on her dinner plate.

    “Daddy, I want a lot!”
    You get two, OK?
    “No, I want a lot! I want twenty!”
    Look, kid, you either get two or zero.
    “I want zero!”

    And I thought, shit, now I know how Obama feels…

  82. 82
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    You have no idea what a stop-loss order is, don’t you?

    I do. I also know that the part of the UCMJ that bans gays and lesbians from serving in the armed forces specifically says it can only be done on a case-by-case basis, which, again, has been stated repeatedly here multiple times but never quite makes it through the concrete block of your head.

  83. 83
    bogart says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    A stop-loss order doesn’t fix anything. It doesn’t address the problem in any meaningful way. DADT will still be in effect, gays and lesbians still won’t be able to serve openly, they still won’t be able to enlist. Granted, they won’t get kicked out either, at least not until the next president rescinds the order.

    As for not defending the laws in court, A) forgive me if I don’t want any executive picking and choosing which laws to defend, even if it’s one I like and B) if DADT isn’t appealed, the Supreme Court will never get to weigh in on the issue, making the entire community still susceptible to future similar but different legislation. Same thing with DOMA.

    I want SCOTUS weighing in on these topics. I want a Brown v. Board of Education for the gay community. But if you’re happy with the weight of the U.S. District Court on your side, declare victory and go home.

  84. 84
    soonergrunt says:

    @Oscar Leroy: What is Obama supposed to do about Clarence Thomas?
    Since reading comprehension seems to be your weak point, I’ll save us all the trouble of waiting for your spend the next three days trying to apply ‘hooked on phonics’ to the Constitution of the United States and point out that only Congress can remove a sitting Supreme Court Justice through impeachment.
    What is Obama supposed to do about Clarence Thomas?

    And on a side not, regarding the DADT angle (and I just love how people who would never serve anyway like to dictate how the military should operate and how servicemembers should live their lives) It’s damn near impossible to put somebody out under DADT as of yesterday, what with it requiring the signatures of the Service Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Defense for Human Resources.

  85. 85
    John Cole says:

    @Jules: That’s just Radley- he hates me these days. Even though I think his work is always stellar and always say so, it just infuriates him that I mock his idiotic corporate stooge co-workers. It is really kind of odd- I would understand if Gillespie and company came after us, but Radley has decided to take things personally. He’s been shit-talking and taking pot shots pretty regularly, and we had a series of testy private emails. It is really quite funny to me- I like the guy and his work, but think all his co-workers are clowns, and this makes him very very mad. It is even funnier that just last Christmas Eve I almost ended up driving three hours to pick him up so his car could be repaired on his trip home. It really isn’t helping my impression that most libertarians have the emotional maturity of a nine year old.

    But having said all that, his work on many important issues has been remarkable. Hell, his work on Cory Maye should have gotten him a pulitzer. And additionally, I thought what DougJ said was stupid and offensive. I would never say anything like that.

  86. 86
    Blue Neponset says:

    I am going to have to agree with the Firebaggers on this one.

    It’s called leadership Mr. President try it sometime.

  87. 87
    Dr. Squid says:

    @Oscar Leroy: So where was he when he could have had an effect? Working to elect those who are more at home with Uganda’a anti-gay laws. Why is Cheney the Foul Mouthed Dick’s talk good enough while the sitting President’s isn’t?

  88. 88
    Ash Can says:

    @Anya: From Sully’s blurb: “He has since changed ‘lawn jockey’ to ‘stooge’.”

    Nooo! Say it ain’t so!

  89. 89
    Cat says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    If the worst thing you can say about Obama’s message is, “No, he’s wrong, people don’t really love me the way I am!” that says a whole lot more about the listener than the message.

    That the listener is either socially isolated and depressed or a whiny narcissist.

    A person with a normal amount of empathy probably will resist the urge to point and laugh at him, which the OP and another commenter didn’t. I was calling them out.

    Its obvious that the anonymous FDL commentator’s opinion is flawed.

  90. 90
    Mojotron says:

    If I had to consult the DSM every time I wanted to snark on some firebagger, I’d never have time to post.

  91. 91
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Gay Americans are ticked at Obama because he not only hasn’t done squat for them, but he enjoys thumbing his nose at them as well. That is why they are mad. “Do something about it, don’t just talk” is a valid reaction.

    See, this is where you get into problems, when you start ascribing motive to actions by saying President Obama “enjoys” thumbing his nose at LGBT individuals. How does that even begin to square with his actions in the real world of making one of these “It Gets Better” videos and showing LGBT individuals all over this country that the President of the United States is aware of their struggle and is on their side? I mean, this is the kind of nonsense the position you are taking devolves into:

    You know what would be better President Obama, if you’d use your bully pulpit and make a national statement about the incidents; but that would require you put yourself out there for the right to criticize, and for conservative nutcase feaux christains to attack you. This, in my mind, is a weak, pathetic gesture done around the midterm elections. If you really feel this strong about this issue, you have a platform no one else in the world has, USE IT!!!!!!!!! And by the way, stop sending two different messages on gay issues. You can’t do a video about gay suicides and then file a lawsuit supporting DADT that buttresses the very homophobia that caused these young individuals to tragically take their lives.

    Right, because filming one of these vignettes, which can and will be viewed millions of people all over this country is not an example of making a “national statement about the incidents”? It’s gotten to the point where people just toss around the phrase “bully pulpit” without understanding that there is no magical delineation of when the Bully Pulpit is turned on versus turned off. Just the very act of recording a message of this nature is an example of the president using the infamous bully pulpit.

    More importantly, what are people like this going to do if and when the DADT repeal happens in the Senate as was intended all along? Where do you go from there, after you accused your ally of not only being a liar and an incompetent governing official, but that he also fundamentally hates you as a human being? What kind of stance is that to take for someone who is serious about achieving legitimate political victories that bring about real, long-lasting substantive change?

    You keep saying “do something about it,” without acknowledging the fact that we are still very much in the throes of the Obama Administration’s plans to “do something about it.” People keep talking like the drive to repeal DADT is dead in the water (and make no mistake, it most certainly would be if those types were leading the charge), as opposed to just stalled for right now before the action heats back up.

    It’s just fascinating to watch a position that is entirely untethered from reality keep growing and growing, drifting farther away from how things actually are proceeding.

  92. 92
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    @Anya:

    Sullivan linking to SwampDaughter’s Shit Hole for a hat tip? Sully is a sad fucking joke. Reason is just jumping on Doug because of all the butthurt he has been dealing them lately. They think they got something to chew on and they are going to jaw gum it to death.

    I agree with DougJ; Juan WIlliams rented his ass out as a lawn jockey for Uncle Rupert and he enjoys the ‘work’.

    End of story.

  93. 93
    taylormattd says:

    You can’ t surprised that commenters at a PUMA / Obama hate site would react like that. Nice to see D-Day posting about it, and it was nice to see Phoenix Woman defending the post.

  94. 94
    Cris says:

    @Glenndacious Greenwaldian (formerly tim): Don’t even bother trying to inject some variation of thought here, my friend; this thread is an especially intense example of our old friend the BJ Circle Jerk.

    That’s right. It’s not that people are sick of commenters who want to rehash the same arguments over and over, it’s epistemic closure.

  95. 95
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    @Steve: Let’s look at the difference: Cheney says he’s for gay marriage yet doesn’t do anything to get legislation passed. Obama is trying to get Congress to repeal the laws preventing gays from being in the military. I think this easily falls in the talk versus action category even if it’s not ask quick as some would like.

  96. 96
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Dr. Squid:

    “Why is Cheney the Foul Mouthed Dick’s talk good enough while the sitting President’s isn’t? ”

    Talk by itself is never good enough.

    What is Obama supposed to do about Clarence Thomas?

    Whoops, I see what I did there. My mistake. That’s what I get for quoting a quote.

    I just love how people who would never serve anyway like to dictate how the military should operate and how servicemembers should live their lives

    Then go to a country that doesn’t have civilian control of its military.

    It’s damn near impossible to put somebody out under DADT as of yesterday

    Yes, thanks to the court.

  97. 97
    Mnemosyne says:

    @soonergrunt:

    And on a side not, regarding the DADT angle (and I just love how people who would never serve anyway like to dictate how the military should operate and how servicemembers should live their lives) It’s damn near impossible to put somebody out under DADT as of yesterday, what with it requiring the signatures of the Service Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Defense for Human Resources.

    Shhh! You’re ruining the narrative with your facts!

  98. 98
    Anya says:

    @Ash Can: @slag: I can’t wait for DougJ’s acceptance speech.

  99. 99
    Blue Neponset says:

    @Midnight Marauder:

    Right, because filming one of these vignettes, which can and will be viewed millions of people all over this country is not an example of making a “national statement about the incidents”?

    Making that video took no political courage on Obama’s part. Good for him for doing it, but why should he get any more credit for it than Tim Gunn?

  100. 100
    Jay in Oregon says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Ding, ding, ding.

  101. 101
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    “Why is Cheney the Foul Mouthed Dick’s talk good enough while the sitting President’s isn’t? ”
    __
    Talk by itself is never good enough.

    Moving the goalposts again, are we? So much for the whole “Cheney is a champion of gay rights and Obama sux” thing you were trying to push about three posts ago.

    Yes, thanks to the court.

    You mean the court that vacated the stay and said that the military can go back to kicking out gay people if they want? You might want to keep up on current events.

  102. 102
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @bogart:

    A stop-loss order doesn’t fix anything.

    It isn’t a permanent fix, of course, but I really, really think that gay servicemembers would rather have that than noting.

    As for not defending the laws in court, A) forgive me if I don’t want any executive picking and choosing which laws to defend, even if it’s one I like

    But that’s how it goes: there is no force on Earth which compels the DoJ to defend every single challenge to every single law. They should defend it. Why–Tradition? Just in case?

    if DADT isn’t appealed, the Supreme Court will never get to weigh in on the issue, making the entire community still susceptible to future similar but different legislation. Same thing with DOMA. I want SCOTUS weighing in on these topics. I want a Brown v. Board of Education for the gay community. But if you’re happy with the weight of the U.S. District Court on your side, declare victory and go home.

    That would be great. But do you think that outcome is guaranteed? There are other courts between this one and the Supreme Court, and who knows how the Supremes would rule?

  103. 103
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    If Obama were to wave his magic wand and do everything the impatient firebaggers and their types want on DADT, only to have it overturned when the next Republican takes the White House, the same assholes would be screaming about how Obama took the easy way out and should have done it the right way so it couldn’t be overturned by another President.

    You know that is what would happen.

  104. 104
    Blue Neponset says:

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent): A generation or two of gay men watched their friends and loved ones die from AIDS while the gov’t response was ‘not ask quick as some would like’. If you expect them to sit by quietly again then you expect too much.

    I have a hard time believing you or anyone else would be so understanding if it were your rights that were being trampled upon.

  105. 105
    slag says:

    @John Cole:

    And additionally, I thought what DougJ said was stupid and offensive.

    Seriously? I thought it was just stating the obvious. This is Juan Williams we’re talking about. Of Michelle Obama as Stokley Carmichael/albatross fame. A more appropriate term for him might be kind of hard to find.

  106. 106
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Blue Neponset:

    Making that video took no political courage on Obama’s part.

    Ah, another goalpost move. First the problem was that Obama wasn’t making a public statement. Now that he’s made a public statement, you schlep the goalposts a few yards and claim that the real problem is that making a public statement that you were demanding he make is no big deal.

    After a few of these goalpost moves, people start to suspect that you don’t actually want what you claim you want and just want to find something new to complain about every time one of your complaints is resolved.

  107. 107
    Dr. Squid says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Talk by itself is never good enough.

    Gee, I must have misinterpreted. Copying, in bold no less, Cheney’s talk without meaningful action wasn’t really a sign that you thought Cheney’s talk was good enough. It was just a bunch of electrons put up on a board for no reason whatsoever.

    You’re talking out of both sides of your mouth, Bub. Again, why is Cheney’s talk good for you while the President’s isn’t? We’ve already established that your line that the President enjoys thumbing his nose at gays is just so much hyperbolic childish bullshit.

  108. 108

    ducking for cover…

    I find that, even though i read FDL regularly, their commenters are vile. They go way past valid criticism into full-on meltdowns. It’s why i don’t really weigh in there anymore. and i think some of my own comments there about the over-the-toppedness have not exactly endeared me to some of the angrier people who post there.

    That said, I do find that I tend to agree with many of their writers on a variety of topics. If Obama wants to make an “it gets better video” that’s great, every bit helps when it comes to preventing teen suicide (gay or otherwise: in my high school in the 1980s, at least 2 kids offed themselves every year).

    But ya know, a lot of people who are not FDL have pointed out that there’s a difference between talk and action, including Dan Savage: “the President of the United States has the power to do more than assure LGBT kids that it will get better; the President of the United States has the power to make it better for LGBT adults and children…. the administration says all the right things, but we don’t see actions that back up these words…”

    It’s worth watching the entire video. But no, i won’t be wading into the fdl comments this time. I’m critical of BO, but i also believe in credit where credit is due.

  109. 109
    Commish says:

    History’s greatest monster? Not quite. but have to admit it’s disappointing that Obama has ordered/allowed the DOJ to appeal the recent ruling on DADT:
    LGM

    As Dan Savage said:
    “Here you have the President of the United States saying that you didn’t choose it — to be gay — and you will get through this…that said, the President of the United States has the power to do more than assure LGBT kids that it will get better; the President of the United States has the power to make it better for LGBT adults and children.”

  110. 110
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Careful. These idiots have bolted the goalpost to the bed of a 4×4 and are heading off road again.

  111. 111
    Anya says:

    @Oscar Leroy: I am sorry I missed that one. I must also have missed Cheney lobbying his supporters in Congress for the repeal of DADT or DOMA. Did I also miss when Cheney spoke out against GOP practice of stirring up hysteria against gays to excite the bigot wing of the party?

  112. 112
    John Cole says:

    @slag: Stooge made a lot more sense, and wasn’t offensive.

  113. 113
    Admiral_Komack says:

    @Odie Hugh Manatee:

    Odie Hugh Manatee Johnson is right!
    (Blazing Saddles reference)

  114. 114
    bogart says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    We’ll never find out if we don’t appeal now will we? And, if we don’t appeal, the community is still just as susceptible to bad legislation as it was before.

    Now your argument boils down to “I’m afraid we might lose.” I am not. The 14th Amendment and the equal protection clause offer no wiggle room here. We’ll win.

  115. 115
    Carnacki says:

    There is the part where he bites the head off a baby penguin that I thought was rather monstrous so those Firebagging commenters might have a point…

  116. 116
    Blue Neponset says:

    @Mnemosyne: Since that was my first public comment on the issue I don’t understand how you can conclude I am moving the goalposts.

    Did you think you were responding to someone else?

  117. 117
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @Blue Neponset:

    Making that video took no political courage on Obama’s part. Good for him for doing it, but why should he get any more credit for it than Tim Gunn?

    The point is that the people using the phrase “bully pulpit” don’t even understand what the fucking phrase means in its actual application. When the President of the United States makes a recording of this nature, that’s the definition of using the bully pulpit (maybe not in the most aggressive style imaginable, which is really what most “progressives” want these days) to bring attention to an issue you, as the POTUS, feel is worthy of increased exposure.

    Also, let’s just look at the dichotomy you have constructed here for President Obama’s efforts. Are you seriously going to maintain that, in this day and age, having the President of the United States come out and recognize LGBT individuals as normal and healthy individuals completely undeserving of the torment and ridicule many receive on a daily basis is not a move that requires political courage of some kind?

    And no one is saying that President Obama deserves some level of extraordinary praise for recording this message, just that it is the height of absurdity and folly to say that this video is somehow a facade of his actually feelings on this issue or that he is thumbing his nose at LGBT individuals by recording this because, GODDAMNIT, DADT hasn’t been repealed yet!

    How many times does it have to be reiterated that a tactical disagreement does not equate to personal animus?

  118. 118
    Anya says:

    @John Cole:

    And additionally, I thought what DougJ said was stupid and offensive.

    If he said the exact same thing about Colms would you have felt the same way?

  119. 119
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    So much for the whole “Cheney is a champion of gay rights and Obama sux” thing you were trying to push about three posts ago.

    Knocked all the stuffing out of that straw man, yet?

    @Midnight Marauder:

    How does that even begin to square with his actions in the real world of making one of these “It Gets Better” videos and showing LGBT individuals all over this country that the President of the United States is aware of their struggle and is on their side?

    Well, just off the top of my head, Obama often associates with anti-gay religious figures like Donnie McClurkin, his administration’s defense of Defense of Marriage Act compared gay marriage to incest and said that gay people have no Constitutional right to get married, and his administration says that homosexuality is a “lifestyle choice”.

  120. 120
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @Blue Neponset:

    A generation or two of gay men watched their friends and loved ones die from AIDS while the gov’t response was ‘not ask quick as some would like’. If you expect them to sit by quietly again then you expect too much.

    Are you seriously going to maintain that the Obama Administration’s performance on LBGT issues is anywhere close to the horrid inhumanity exhibited by the Reagan Administration?

    Is that seriously a discussion you want to get into?

  121. 121
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    @Admiral_Komack:

    “Hold it! The next man that makes a move, the nigger gets it.”

    That is one great movie that I will always enjoy watching.

  122. 122
    slag says:

    @John Cole: Having thought the cross-out and “stooge” were original to the post, I may concede your point somewhat. But I would point out that Juan Williams’ “stooge”ness is surely intended to provide cover for Faux’s overt and covert racism. In that sense, I thought the lj-stooge combo totally worked. It told a truth that is often ignored and made me laugh.

  123. 123
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Dr. Squid:

    Gee, I must have misinterpreted. Copying, in bold no less, Cheney’s talk without meaningful action wasn’t really a sign that you thought Cheney’s talk was good enough.

    Sigh. Someone said that Cheney never came out for gay marriage while he was VP. So I showed that he did.

    How many times does it have to be reiterated that a tactical disagreement does not equate to personal animus?

    It would be nice if more people on this blog would practice that principle.

  124. 124
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Blue Neponset:

    Possibly. I’ve seen several people posting here complaining about how Obama hasn’t said anything personally about the suicides, so I may have thought you were one of them. If not, and if you have never said that you didn’t think the president isn’t saying enough publicly in support of gay rights, then I apologize.

    I understand people being annoyed that there isn’t as much action as they want. I don’t understand people being annoyed that Obama isn’t talking about LGBT issues enough and then saying that talk is cheap when he does talk about them.

  125. 125
    Blue Neponset says:

    @Midnight Marauder:

    Also, let’s just look at the dichotomy you have constructed here for President Obama’s efforts. Are you seriously going to maintain that, in this day and age, having the President of the United States come out and recognize LGBT individuals as normal and healthy individuals completely undeserving of the torment and ridicule many receive on a daily basis is not a move that requires political courage of some kind?

    That is exactly what I maintain.

    The people who want gay children to kill themselves aren’t going to vote for the Kenyan Usurper no matter what he does. This video took as much political courage as coming out against dog fighting or usury laws.

  126. 126
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    It would be nice if more people on this blog would practice that principle.

    Because calling the president a homophobe is a mere tactical disagreement.

  127. 127
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @bogart:

    The 14th Amendment and the equal protection clause offer no wiggle room here.

    A lot of people don’t see that fact, though. And a court that rules corporations are people, strip-searching a little girl isn’t a violation of privacy, and counting votes in a presidential election is a luxury we can’t always afford is capable of literally anything.

  128. 128
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    It would be nice if more people on this blog would practice that principle.

    Says the person who wrote the following:

    Gay Americans are ticked at Obama because he not only hasn’t done squat for them, but he enjoys thumbing his nose at them as well.

    Get off your fucking high horse and practice your own apparent belief.

  129. 129
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @Blue Neponset:

    The people who want gay children to kill themselves aren’t going to vote for the Kenyan Usurper no matter what he does. This video took as much political courage as coming out against dog fighting or usury laws.

    Right. Because no human being has ever experienced a profound shift in perspective when an issue like this struck them especially close to home. Moreso, those people are the only intended audience for this message? No. They are not.

    I’m pretty sure there are a shitload more people in this country who are much more inclined to be swayed by the message of equality than those who are not. Maybe you should focus on them for a change as opposed to sinking into the mire because teabaggers will never stop hating the gays.

  130. 130
    nhoj says:

    I can has no strike through?

  131. 131
    Odie Hugh Manatee says:

    @Blue Neponset:

    You deserve McCain and Snowbilly Snookie.

    I’m outta here for a bit. Too much crybaby whining and the bullshit is getting deep. Its heady bouquet may be something the firebaggers like but that’s because they are used to swimming in it.

    Gargling with it too. Whining the whole time.

  132. 132
    J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford says:

    @Anya:

    Exactly.

    I really picked the worst possible time to quit smoking.

  133. 133
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Because calling the president a homophobe is a mere tactical disagreement.

    Where did I do that?

    @Mnemosyne:

    I also know that the part of the UCMJ that bans gays and lesbians from serving in the armed forces specifically says it can only be done on a case-by-case basis

    Oh, well, that changes. . . almost nothing, actually. So do it on a case-by-case basis. Obama might have to spend less time golfing or congratulating the WNBA champions, but it would be worth it. Assuming you are right, which I am hardly sure of.

  134. 134

    So now gay supporters of President Obama have a White House party and a video. Yay. Meanwhile, the DADT injunction is lifted on Spirit Day, Dan Choi’s re-enlistment papers just got shredded, DOMA remains the law of the land, and ENDA is still nowhere to be found.

    The DADT repeal was one vote away from happening in the Senate. All Democrats plus the two Independents that caucus with them had voted for it. Did President Obama pick up the phone and call Susan Collins? No. In fact, he called no one. It died.

    So you’ll pardon me if I just can’t vote like it’s 2008, when I was voting FOR someone for one of the few times in my life, someone who had promised to be a “fierce advocate” for gay rights. I’ll just be voting against the open opponent to get the “farce advocate” elected from now on. Because, hey, free party!

  135. 135
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Because calling the president a homophobe is a mere tactical disagreement.

    Where did I do that?

    Again, since you missed it the first time when you wrote it and then pushed Submit:

    Gay Americans are ticked at Obama because he not only hasn’t done squat for them, but he enjoys thumbing his nose at them as well.

  136. 136
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Midnight Marauder:

    Alright, it was wrong to say he “enjoys” frustrating gay Americans.

  137. 137
    Blue Neponset says:

    @Midnight Marauder: Sure, let’s have that discussion.

    Results matter. If Obama were to continue water boarding detainees even though he considers the practice repugnant and unconstitutional would that be better or worse than when Dubya did it? My answer is worse.

    Also, I brought up the AIDS crisis because it is important to look at the struggle for gay rights in its entirety. Asking gay men to sit by quietly while the rest of the nation catches up has been done before and people shouldn’t forget that.

  138. 138
    soonergrunt says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Yes, thanks to the court.

    Oh, look here, Stupid Bastard FAIL!
    9th Circuit reinstates gay ban and from Anne Flaherty with the Associated Press:

    Defense Secretary Robert Gates ordered that all dismissals under the 1993 law must now be decided by one of the four service secretaries in consultation with the military’s general counsel and his personnel chief.

  139. 139
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Obama might have to spend less time golfing or congratulating the WNBA champions, but it would be worth it.

    That’s right, you’re the one who came up with the “he congratulated the WNBA champions!” whine. Because, really, how dare he congratulate a lowly women’s basketball team when he could have been doing important work that would have helped the menz, amirite?

    Funny how you never complain that he congratulated the NBA champions, or the Superbowl champions, or the NHL champions. Nope, it’s the fact that he congratulated a bunch of girls that sticks in your craw, isn’t it?

  140. 140
    YellowJournalism says:

    @Mojotron: Reading that comment makes you think the reason that person has no one to love and care about him/her has nothing do to with sexual orientation.

  141. 141

    @soonergrunt: Which of the four service secretaries in consultation with the military’s general counsel and his personnel chief ordered the shredding of Dan Choi’s re-enlistment papers this morning?

    Let me paraphrase a paragraph from a recent Doug front-page post to explain this to you folks:

    Does everything always have to revolve around making non-heterosexual Americans eat shit? It’s not enough to just thank your Democratic overlords for making a video, it’s not enough to let powerful people throw you a party in a government building you don’t feel welcome in, now non-heterosexual Americans have to express shame for thinking that their actual issues ought to matter to the people who got their votes by saying they mattered.

    Always have to be the one to smile and apologize, indeed.

  142. 142
    Chrisd says:

    How about we praise the speech as a kind and thoughtful gesture but don’t elevate it to the list of Obama’s GLBT accomplishments?

    No snark about political ploys, and no false equivalency between, say, DADT repeal and a YouTube video.

    That way, no one is insulted.

  143. 143
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Joseph Nobles:

    The DADT repeal was one vote away from happening in the Senate. All Democrats plus the two Independents that caucus with them had voted for it. Did President Obama pick up the phone and call Susan Collins? No. In fact, he called no one. It died.

    I realize that it’s hard for you to face the fact that Susan Collins lied to you when she claimed she would vote for the repeal, but that’s what she did. She had no intention at all of voting for it and grasped at the first weak excuse she could find to justify voting against it.

    If you’re going to build your dreams on having a Republican — especially a self-described “moderate” Republican — actually do something that might help a Democratic president, you should probably give up having dreams at all.

    Susan Collins was never going to vote to repeal DADT, even if Obama came to her office personally and begged on his knees for her vote. Not ever.

  144. 144
    soonergrunt says:

    @Blue Neponset:

    if it were your rights that were being trampled upon.

    Who, exactly has a RIGHT to serve in the military?

    If you want to argue that military service is one of the means by which any group establishes its collective bona fides as rightfully full members of society and polity, and that by doing so they establish a moral case for full protection under the law, that’s one thing, and I’d agree with you wholeheartedly, but nobody has a right to join the Army.

    We don’t let blind people join or stay in after they become blind. We don’t let paraplegics join or stay in the service after they become paralyzed. We limit what people can join the service to do based upon their individual performance on entrance tests, and we even refuse entry to people because of prior behavior or educational failures.

  145. 145
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    LOL.

    Here’s why I picked the team I did:

    While DADT repeal supporters were frantically trying to scrounge up the votes to block the filibuster, the President didn’t lift a finger to keep Democrats in line, or to try to embarrass Republicans for the “un-American” act of voting against a defense bill (something the GOP routinely accused Democrats of during their years in the majority). Instead of calling members of the Senate about the DOD bill, the President was busy calling the WNBA champions.

    http://gay.americablog.com/201.....aving.html

    I will never apologize for slamming golf, however.

  146. 146
    MoZeu says:

    @Linda Featheringill: Yes. And our President is a person who crossed that bridge long ago. I might not always agree with him, but I always respect this man. I don’t really know what those crazy firebaggers are missing that they cannot see his fundamental decency.

  147. 147
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    If you’re going to build your dreams on having a Republican—especially a self-described “moderate” Republican—actually do something that might help a Democratic president, you should probably give up having dreams at all.

    I could not agree more.

    Now, isn’t that exactly what Obama did with his “let Congress do it” plan?

    I don’t really know what those crazy firebaggers are missing that they cannot see his fundamental decency.

    Maybe they are blinded by his actions?

  148. 148
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Obama often associates with anti-gay religious figures like Donnie McClurkin

    How many times has Obama ever been around Donnie McClurkin? Or “anti-gay religious figures” other than what IIRC were two things with Rick Warren two years ago? Are you still going with “often”? I mean, I think Rick Warren is repulsive, but I also don’t think that he’s some sort of important figure in Obama’s personal pantheon.

  149. 149
    Blue Neponset says:

    @soonergrunt:

    Oh, look here, Stupid Bastard FAIL!

    You really can’t understand why some people are upset with Obama over an issue very important to them?

    I agree that Obama can’t fix everything, but he could be doing more about gay rights issues. Why should I and others who think this way STFU about it? I am sorry if we are bothering you but you really shouldn’t take it so personally.

  150. 150
    MoZeu says:

    @Lolis: I don’t know, but I have long felt it was unfortunate that Lt. Choi has become the public face of the movement to end DADT. That is all.

  151. 151
    soonergrunt says:

    @Carnacki: That would actually be pretty cool to see. Think of how quiet the room would get all of a sudden. Then he could follow up with “YOU PISSANTS WANT A PIECE OF ME?!”
    I’d pay cash money to see that shit.

  152. 152
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Good thing gay men never, ever condescend to women or downplay women’s concerns. You never, say, have an Andrew Sullivan talk about how it’s right and good for the government to dictate to women what kind of medical care they should be allowed to receive because he finds abortion icky. Otherwise, the fact that you found your link on Americablog would just prove my point.

  153. 153
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    While DADT repeal supporters were frantically trying to scrounge up the votes to block the filibuster, the President didn’t lift a finger to keep Democrats in line, or to try to embarrass Republicans for the “un-American” act of voting against a defense bill (something the GOP routinely accused Democrats of during their years in the majority).

    1. What DADT repeal supporter was “frantic” and how were they trying to “scrounge up votes”?

    1a. What Democrat wasn’t being kept in line? They all voted for the fucking bill. Then at the end the Arkies switched.

    2. I remember Democrats immediately chiding Republicans for playing politics with the defense budget, the day the vote failed. But then there was this other story that kind of sapped it of a lot of impact. Something about how gay activists were really mad at Obama, I think.

  154. 154
    Blue Neponset says:

    @soonergrunt:

    Who, exactly has a RIGHT to serve in the military?

    No one.

    We all, however, have the right to equal protection under the law. Therefore, gay people should be able to join the military subject to the same restrictions placed upon non-gay people.

  155. 155
    eemom says:

    @Chrisd:

    It’s a nice thought, but peacemaking will get you nowhere on this blog.

    @Blue Neponset:

    You’re kind of obtuse, but your screen name is pretty. What is a blue neponset?

  156. 156
    YellowJournalism says:

    Reading the rest of the comments (I knew better than to have commented before doing that.), I see I am not alone in that sentiment and am also unsympathetic because of it. Oh well. That was just the first thought that came into my head, since the original comment itself was a strange attack on something that is at best very noble and at worst a PR opportunity.

    Chrisd sums up my feelings about this, exactly. Too bad, as someone pointed out, reason and pragmatism won’t win the day on any side.

  157. 157

    @Mnemosyne: Thank you for your shit sandwich, sir. May I have another?

  158. 158
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Now, isn’t that exactly what Obama did with his “let Congress do it” plan?

    Congress has to do it. There is no executive order that can overturn the UCMJ and magically make it legal for gay people to serve in the armed forces.

    I realize that you’ll be perfectly happy slapping a band-aid on the sucking chest wound and letting it remain illegal for gay people to serve in the military as long as there’s a temporary stop-loss that will prevent some dismissals for the next couple of years, but some of us actually think we should resolve the underlying problem rather than going for the quick fix.

  159. 159
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Joseph Nobles:

    Yes, the Republicans fed you a shit sandwich and you blame Obama for it. What’s up with that?

  160. 160
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @Blue Neponset:

    Results matter. If Obama were to continue water boarding detainees even though he considers the practice repugnant and unconstitutional would that be better or worse than when Dubya did it? My answer is worse.
    __
    Also, I brought up the AIDS crisis because it is important to look at the struggle for gay rights in its entirety. Asking gay men to sit by quietly while the rest of the nation catches up has been done before and people shouldn’t forget that.

    No, you brought up the AIDS crisis as a comparative example to illustrate what you believe to be the Obama Administration’s inactivity and inattention to LGBT issues. Now you’re resorting to bringing in examples from a completely foreign subject (waterboarding) and trying to maintain that gay men (who gives a shit about lesbians, transgenders, and bisexuals though, right? Fuck those clowns!) are being asked “to sit by quietly” while the hard work of granting them institutionally protected civil rights is attended to. But that is not even remotely close to reflecting the reality, now is it?

    For starters, you have a president who recognizes LGBT individuals (and not just gay men, as you so tellingly revealed in your last post) as legitimate human beings, and not as inhuman monsters undeserving of basic rights and decency. Moreover, his administration has worked to pass several pieces of legislation to benefit LGBT individuals and has well positioned DADT to be repealed via placing it in the defense bill (their preferred method for affecting long-term change).

    More sinister in your statement is the implication that if there was an equivalent of the AIDS crisis today, you believe the Obama Administration would behave in a manner similar to the Reagan Administration, and that is a pretty disgusting accusation with no real evidence to support such a position.

  161. 161
    batgirl says:

    @Oscar Leroy: As you point out those are “just words.” Tell me concretely what Dick Cheney has actually done.

  162. 162
    beergoggles says:

    He would have been criticized for not making a video, and he’s being criticized for making the video.

    I for one am extremely glad he made such a vid.

    Sometimes I’m just a bit confused where I fit in on the Obama hate-o-meter..

  163. 163
    sherifffruitfly says:

    How about we praise the speech as a kind and thoughtful gesture but don’t elevate it to the list of Obama’s GLBT accomplishments? No snark about political ploys, and no false equivalency between, say, DADT repeal and a YouTube video. That way, no one is insulted.

    @Chrisd:

    Because one would be a fool to expect rationality from “true progressives”. They’re far too busy showing off for each other, how much more trueprogressivey they are than they rest of us.

  164. 164
    Blue Neponset says:

    @eemom: Neponset is a very polluted river in Massachusetts.

    Love that dirty water….

  165. 165
    Mnemosyne says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    I remember Democrats immediately chiding Republicans for playing politics with the defense budget, the day the vote failed. But then there was this other story that kind of sapped it of a lot of impact. Something about how gay activists were really mad at Obama, I think.

    See, there you are pointing out that bad tactics on the part of anti-DADT people actually made it harder for the Democrats to sell their message that Republicans were hurting the country with their refusal to vote. Don’t you know it’s homophobic to criticize someone’s tactics and say they would have gotten a better result doing it another way?

  166. 166
    sherifffruitfly says:

    John, the title of this post is a bit off, because to “true progressives”, there is simply NO SUCH THING as a good deed done by Obama.

  167. 167
    Blue Neponset says:

    No, you brought up the AIDS crisis as a comparative example to illustrate what you believe to be the Obama Administration’s inactivity and inattention to LGBT issues.

    I did?

    I stopped reading after that. Welcome to the ignore list.

  168. 168
    FlipYrWhig says:

    I’m already outraged by Obama’s _next_ obvious attempt to pacify my outrage! When it happens, and believe me, it will, I will have had to have had to not have put up with something like that!

  169. 169
    soonergrunt says:

    @Joseph Nobles:

    Which of the four service secretaries in consultation with the military’s general counsel and his personnel chief ordered the shredding of Dan Choi’s re-enlistment papers this morning?

    In what Fantasy Victim Land of yours did this happen?
    Because it’s not anywhere other than Choi’s assertion on Twitter about 15 minutes ago?
    Which doesn’t make it wrong–it could be true. It would also be illegal for them to do so. Where have I ever said that anything in the military is instantaneous?

  170. 170
    Paula says:

    @mistermix:

    Firebaggery aside, it really would be nice if Cheney did this, if not for his own sense of decency then at least for his daughter and her family.

    I cannot think but that woman must have serious issues about supporting her father all her life but seeing the kind of bandwagon he has to truck with. An “it gets better” video would be a nice gesture.

  171. 171
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    “How many times has Obama ever been around Donnie McClurkin?”

    As I remember, Obama agreed to have him at a bunch of his campaign appearances in the South during campaign ’08.

  172. 172
    Agoraphobic Kleptomaniac says:

    @soonergrunt:

    We don’t let blind people join or stay in after they become blind. We don’t let paraplegics join or stay in the service after they become paralyzed. We limit what people can join the service to do based upon their individual performance on entrance tests, and we even refuse entry to people because of prior behavior or educational failures.

    Waiting for your connection between physical disabilities and being gay…

    I think people are divided over this because, personally, I feel like Obama is using his YouTube Bully Pulpit to pat me on the head with one hand, while Hippie Punching me in the courts. The White House’s statement about how DADT should only be fixed in Congress is probably the biggest load I’ve heard from the democrats this year. They might have well just have called it a decision from an “activist Judge” to complete the spin.

    I also thought the line about “someone being there for you” was tone-deaf. There are a lot of homeless kids right now who don’t have anyone, because they are gay. Telling someone that they should turn to someone who cares salts a pretty fresh wound for some people, especially when they might be depressed and feel alone. It’s a nitpick, and I wouldn’t have even mentioned it if it hadn’t already bounced around this thread.

  173. 173
    batgirl says:

    @Steve:

    Who cares? It’s easy to imagine Bush making the exact same video.

    We don’t have to imagine. Where is Bush’s “It Gets Better” video? Are former Presidents not allowed to make them? Did I miss it?

  174. 174
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @batgirl:

    As you point out those are “just words.” Tell me concretely what Dick Cheney has actually done.

    See post #123, which explains everything I have said and have to say about Dick Cheney on this subject.

  175. 175
    Paula says:

    dup

  176. 176
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Agoraphobic Kleptomaniac:

    The White House’s statement about how DADT should only be fixed in Congress is probably the biggest load I’ve heard from the democrats this year.

    So how do you think the UCMJ should be modified to remove the language that says gay people cannot serve in the military? It can’t be done with an executive order — it’s been settled law for over 50 years that the president cannot use an EO to change a law that was duly passed by Congress.

    So what’s your plan to alter the law that currently states that it is illegal for gay people to serve in the military?

  177. 177
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Agoraphobic Kleptomaniac:

    “The White House’s statement about how DADT should only be fixed in Congress is probably the biggest load I’ve heard from the democrats this year. ”

    I think Obama is letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

  178. 178
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @Blue Neponset:

    No, you brought up the AIDS crisis as a comparative example to illustrate what you believe to be the Obama Administration’s inactivity and inattention to LGBT issues.

    I did?

    Yeah, you did.

    A generation or two of gay men watched their friends and loved ones die from AIDS while the gov’t response was ‘not ask quick as some would like’. If you expect them to sit by quietly again then you expect too much.

    Notice how you compare the generation of gay men who went through the AIDS crisis with the generation currently experiencing the effort to repeal DADT. “Sit by quietly again

    That typically indicates a comparison to a previous event is happening.

    I stopped reading after that. Welcome to the ignore list.

    Apparently, your ignore list consists of at least me and your own words. Decent company, I suppose.

  179. 179
    soonergrunt says:

    @Blue Neponset: I don’t take anything but rank stupidity personally.
    If you want to be taken more seriously, and I can’t see why my opinion would matter to you, then perhaps you ought to know what the fuck you’re talking about. How things work, like the whole three-branch federal government and the checks and balances thing.
    Maybe you ought to have been working hard to support the guy to get the change you wanted instead of sitting back and doing nothing but pissing and moaning about it. How many times did you call Olympia Snowe’s office or Susan Collins’ office or Ben Nelson’s office or donate time and money to secure a filibuster proof majority or at least a more ideologically strong majority? Cause all I see is a bunch of spoiled brats.

  180. 180
    Suck It Up! says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    That’s right, you’re the one who came up with the “he congratulated the WNBA champions!” whine. Because, really, how dare he congratulate a lowly women’s basketball team when he could have been doing important work that would have helped the menz, amirite

    ?

    In Oscar’s defense, he’s just being a parrot. I believe I first saw that smear on Sullivan’s blog which originally came from Dan Savage (who may have picked it up from someone else). Dan Savage claims that Obama could have used that time to call Snowe (or was it Snow?) to ask her to change her vote. I guess he doesn’t know these “moderates” very well. Sullivan posted the statement on his blog and said he was “speechless”.

  181. 181
    Elie says:

    @NonyNony:

    These are NOT liberals. They are leftists or leftist progressives or libertarians. True liberal ideas are about supporting diverse opinions and appreciating all citizens. These are authoritarian leftists who want what they want when they want it. Screw liberalism

  182. 182
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Mnemosyne: Also, honestly, I think the more it’s talked about as “DADT repeal” the squishier some Democrats will get. Like you said the other day, the worst outcome would be the scaredy-cat Senate Dems agreeing to pull DADT repeal from the defense bill just to get it passed. I think “Republicans hate gay people so much they’re willing to defund The Troops At A Time Of War just to make that point” is a _very good message_ for Democrats. Even Democrats who don’t even like gay people and their political issues! But instead you’ve got people intent on saying “Democrats suck and Obama’s the worst of the lot.” That’s really not helpful, not just in terms of how it plays politically, but in terms of how it affects policymaking.

  183. 183

    @Mnemosyne: It really isn’t enough for you that I vote Democratic and will continue to do so after this. No, I have to grin and like it.

    Well, fuck that. You may not recognize the actions of a White House that doesn’t want to do something for a key constituency, but we do. There will be no smiling and apologizing here.

  184. 184
    Elie says:

    Uh-oh — the strikethrough monster is back again.

    Man, its been a bitch on BJ this morning. First no right margins, then a bunch of stuff from the margins moved into the center of the page, now this…

    John, why is this site so singularly afflicted?

  185. 185
    soonergrunt says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    So how do you think the UCMJ should be modified to remove the language that says gay people cannot serve in the military? It can’t be done with an executive order—it’s been settled law for over 50 years that the president cannot use an EO to change a law that was duly passed by Congress.

    So what’s your plan to alter the law that currently states that it is illegal for gay people to serve in the military?

    Didn’t you know about the super-secret constitutional amendment that says that laws we don’t like aren’t subject to reality?

  186. 186
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Mnemosyne: @Mnemosyne:

    Here’s my plan:

    1) Issue an executive order telling the branches of our military to stop enforcing Don’t Ask Don’t tell until America’s current wars are over. If this must be done case-by-case, do so.

    2) Forget about appealing the court decision calling DADT unconstitutional. There is no need to defend DADT. The US Constitution does not say the president must defend a law against being overturned, nor does any US federal law.

  187. 187
    Elie says:

    ..and there went the right margin again…

    Sheesh

  188. 188
    soonergrunt says:

    @Oscar Leroy: And you’re letting the ‘feels good’ be the enemy of the ‘actually doable.’

  189. 189
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    As I remember, Obama agreed to have him at a bunch of his campaign appearances in the South during campaign ‘08.

    Let’s go to the Wikipedia page for Donnie McClurkin:

    McClurkin’s listing as a headlining performer for Senator Barack Obama’s 2008 Presidential campaign stirred controversy because of his views on homosexuality.[11][12][13] As a result McClurkin was removed from the performance roster but he still performed at one of the concerts.[14]

    Here’s the coverage from TPM at the time.

    That doesn’t look like “a bunch.” It looks like “one.” Earlier you used the word “often.” I’m not confident that’s accurate.

  190. 190

    @FlipYrWhig:

    I think “Republicans hate gay people so much they’re willing to defund The Troops At A Time Of War just to make that point” is a very good message for Democrats.

    What a fantastic message! Which one of our Democratic overlords is using it? Harry Reid? Joe Lieberman? Barack “Fierce Advocate” Obama?

    Bueller?

    Because as you point out, it sure as shit will be applied the other way around.

  191. 191
    Suck It Up! says:

    @Chrisd:

    How about we praise the speech as a kind and thoughtful gesture but don’t elevate it to the list of Obama’s GLBT accomplishments?

    No one claimed it was an accomplishment. How about liberals stop moving the goal posts? I guarantee that if Obama had not participated in this campaign, it would have been cited as proof that he hates gays. Don’t demand he use the bully pulpit and then piss and moan when he does. The negative reaction to Obama’s video is not helpful to the campaign. Show the same tolerance and openness that you are demanding. They should be encouraging anyone and everyone to say something.

  192. 192
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Suck It Up!:

    In Oscar’s defense, he’s just being a parrot. I believe I first saw that smear on Sullivan’s blog which originally came from Dan Savage (who may have picked it up from someone else).

    LOL. So you are saying that Obama did call Republicans to get them to vote for repeal, or what? What, exactly, is your position here?

    If Obama did not call a WNBA team on the day of the defense authorization vote, then I was flat wrong for saying he did, and I apologize.

  193. 193
    Agoraphobic Kleptomaniac says:

    @Mnemosyne: Why alter the law? Didn’t the court rule it was unconstitutional on the basis it was a restriction of free speech? Bad laws die in the courts. That’s what higher level courts do when laws conflict with the constitution. The constitution is what politicians are expected to uphold in this country.

  194. 194
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    “That doesn’t look like “a bunch.” It looks like “one.” Earlier you used the word “often.” I’m not confident that’s accurate. ”

    Great! Big props to Obama for only having a known bigot appear at one of his rallies.

    @soonergrunt:

    “And you’re letting the ‘feels good’ be the enemy of the ‘actually doable.’ ”

    Why is a stop-loss order not doable? Why is not appealing the court’s decision not doable? Please quote federal statute or Constitutional provision.

  195. 195
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Joseph Nobles:

    It really isn’t enough for you that I vote Democratic and will continue to do so after this. No, I have to grin and like it.

    No, you have to direct your efforts at the people who are actually blocking you from getting what you want rather than the people whose efforts are being blocked.

    If Obama had done nothing towards a DADT repeal this year, I would probably agree with you. But it’s in the fucking DoD appropriations bill for next year! It’s been passed by the House! People are actively working to try and get it passed!

    But because they weren’t able to get it passed fast enough for your taste, to you it’s exactly like Obama refused to do anything at all this year.

    That’s what I get pissed about: there’s been a huge amount of movement towards the DADT repeal this year but because it didn’t happen on your schedule, you act like nothing was done at all.

  196. 196
    Blue Neponset says:

    @soonergrunt: How do you know what I did or didn’t do to get a filibuster proof majority?

  197. 197
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Elie:

    “..and there went the right margin again…”

    In about 24,000 miles it will be back where it should be.

  198. 198
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Joseph Nobles:

    What a fantastic message! Which one of our Democratic overlords is using it? Harry Reid? Joe Lieberman? Barack “Fierce Advocate” Obama?

    Well, they used it that same day and for several days afterwards, until you geniuses decided to drown them out with your sad cries about how poor Susan Collins was forced to vote against it because Obama didn’t kiss her ass enough.

  199. 199
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    If Obama had done nothing towards a DADT repeal this year, I would probably agree with you. But it’s in the fucking DoD appropriations bill for next year! It’s been passed by the House! People are actively working to try and get it passed!

    Wasn’t it Congress that put it in the bill? Does Obama have a vote in the House of Representatives?

    Well, they used it that same day and for several days afterwards, until you geniuses decided to drown them out with your sad cries about how poor Susan Collins was forced to vote against it because Obama didn’t kiss her ass enough.

    Let’s just be clear here: You are, here and now, saying that the Democratic leadership *had* to stop slamming Republicans for not passing a defense appropriation because people like Joseph Nobles forced them to? That sounds like an exceedingly bizarre proposition to me.

  200. 200

    @Mnemosyne:

    That’s what I get pissed about: there’s been a huge amount of movement towards the DADT repeal this year but because it didn’t happen on your schedule, you act like nothing was done at all.

    Explain exactly when DADT repeal gets scheduled again in Congress. Explain exactly how the lame duck Congressional session will “get ‘er done.” Explain exactly how the upcoming Republican House will be adding it into appropriations from here on out.

    The goddam plane has flown into the mountain. The pilot didn’t pull us out of the tailspin on my schedule. Thanks for my shit sandwich, sir! May I have another?

  201. 201
    batgirl says:

    @Oscar Leroy: This

    I think Obama is letting the perfect be the enemy of the good

    is very different from your earlier quote

    but he [Obama] enjoys thumbing his nose at them as well

    and actually allows room for rational, sane discussion.

    You may be right, you may disagree with the way Obama is going about rescinding DADT, and I think it is possible to have thoughtful intelligent discussions about this. But the “Obama hates teh gays! and he’s worse than Bush” discussion are bullshit and lead nowhere.

    I’m not sure I agree with the way that Obama has handled this and criticism is fair, but I also think that Obama does want to see DADT ultimately done away with.

    I also think and hope that these discussions will soon be over. I truly believe we are nearing the end.

  202. 202
    Holden Pattern says:

    Before you throw around that “butthurt” line about people who are disappointed in Obama’s record on GLBT issues, perhaps you could consider all of the people in California who heard over and over again “but even President Obama doesn’t support same-sex marriage” during the hateful lie-filled campaign for Proposition 8.

    Among all of the hateful lies in that anti-gay campaign, that was one of the few truthful things they said, and it’s pretty hard to forget that the politics of a man born of a mixed-race marriage, who should have been steeped in the justice tradition, was used as a cudgel against equality for gay people.

  203. 203
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Big props to Obama for only having a known bigot appear at one of his rallies.

    You said he “often” is in the company of anti-gay people, and appeared with McClurkin a “bunch” of times. You were blatantly and obviously wrong. If you had said that one McClurkin appearance was bad enough, I wouldn’t even have said anything. But you didn’t. You said it happened a lot, and implied that it was typical. Neither is true. You’re welcome.

  204. 204
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Issue an executive order telling the branches of our military to stop enforcing Don’t Ask Don’t tell until America’s current wars are over. If this must be done case-by-case, do so.

    Listen, genius. Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is not actually what gets people thrown out of the military. The fact that it is currently against federal law for gay people to serve in the military is what gets them thrown out. Deciding not to prosecute people for being gay in the military is not the same thing as making it legal.

    Forget about appealing the court decision calling DADT unconstitutional. There is no need to defend DADT. The US Constitution does not say the president must defend a law against being overturned, nor does any US federal law.

    And when President Palin takes over and directs her DoJ to pick the case back up again?

    Again, you want to paper over the problems and pretend they’re not there. I want to actually fix the problem so it can’t come back and bite us in the ass down the road. And yet for some reason I’m an evil homophobe for wanting that and you’re a champion of all that’s right and good.

  205. 205
    soonergrunt says:

    @Oscar Leroy: Well the first part of your ‘solution’ is already done, as has been pointed out previously.
    The second part is a non-starter because DADT has already been found to be constitutional in other judicial circuits and therefore we have the classic circuit clash and the court’s judgment doesn’t matter outside the Central District of California. It’s still the law of the land in Eastern District of Virginia.

  206. 206
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Agoraphobic Kleptomaniac:

    Why alter the law? Didn’t the court rule it was unconstitutional on the basis it was a restriction of free speech?

    The 14th Amendment has nothing to do with free speech. If you don’t even know the constitutional basis on which the court overturned the law, why am I supposed to think you understand anything else about the topic?

  207. 207
    soonergrunt says:

    @Blue Neponset: Well, from your circular firing squad thing you got going on here, it’s not exactly a huge leap of logic.

  208. 208
    lamh32 says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    It’s 2010. Please find and name the times in ’08 that Obama was “campaigining” with McClurken. I bet u won’t find more than 1

    There is only 1 reason why the McClurken meme is still being spouted. Because many members of the LGBT believe that Black Christians are homophobic and even though supporters don’t buy into the right’s Rev Wright meme, they do realize that Obama has attributed much of his adult life of accomplishments to his involvement within the Black church.

    The only link from Obama to McClurken is the Black Church…period.

    But it’s just enough for people like you and cling to in your outrage!

  209. 209
    Blue Neponset says:

    @soonergrunt: So everyone who is upset about Obama’s handling of GBLT issues didn’t help out during the election? I hope you don’t really believe such a thing.

  210. 210

    @Mnemosyne:

    Well, they used it that same day and for several days afterwards, until you geniuses decided to drown them out with your sad cries about how poor Susan Collins was forced to vote against it because Obama didn’t kiss her ass enough.

    Oh, now you really need to back the fuck up, because you have no idea what I said about Susan Collins at the time, you ignorant ass.

    boloboffin Joseph Nobles
    How about a hand for @senatorcollins, Queen of the Bigots! Every needless and unjust DADT discharge is on your head, Senator. Shame, shame.
    21 Sep Favorite Reply Delete
    __
    boloboffin Joseph Nobles
    For @senatorcollins, Republican efforts to enforce bigotry are MORE important than ending bigotry today. This is her Dred Scott moment.
    21 Sep
    __
    boloboffin Joseph Nobles
    Shorter @senatorcollins: “Can’t vote for what’s right because caucus will crucify me. My job over yours, gay soldiers!”
    21 Sep
    »
    __
    boloboffin Joseph Nobles
    Thanks, @senatorcollins, for standing with the bigots and obstructionists today! Institutionalized discrimination lives thanks to you!
    21 Sep Favorite Reply Delete
    __
    boloboffin Joseph Nobles
    Susan Collins filibusters DADT repeal because discriminating against U.S. soldiers is the same as Repubs not getting to obstruct legislation
    21 Sep
    __
    boloboffin Joseph Nobles
    No, @markknoller, Susan Collins doesn’t get to “support” DADT repeal any longer. When push came to shove, she stood with the bigots.
    __
    boloboffin Joseph Nobles
    Repubs upset about not being able to add amendments to Def Appropriation are like parent murderer asking for mercy because he’s an orphan.

    As I have said, voting against the open opponent is what I will be doing. But that doesn’t mean I’m going to smile and apologize to the “farce advocates” because of a party and a video.

  211. 211
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Joseph Nobles:

    Explain exactly when DADT repeal gets scheduled again in Congress.

    I’m gonna go with “when the must-pass defense bill comes back up for a vote.” And that’s when and where DADT-repeal supporters should scream loud, long, and hard at their Senators. Because some Democrats in the Senate will be (sadly) tempted to say that it’s not worth it to have a big fight about gay rights when the bill has to pass.

    So the idea is: (1) the Pentagon formulates a policy; (2) Scaredy-cat Democrats can say they’re only following the directions of the military experts at the Pentagon; (3) They make themselves stand tall by wrapping themselves in the flag.

    Republicans will say that they’re homo-lovers playing politics with the military; Democrats will say that Republicans are the ones playing politics with the military, and that the military brass is on _their_ side, because, look at the policy.

    It’s all set up. It doesn’t even take _that_ much courage because the Army Guys are on _our_ side for a change. Just. Let. That. Happen. It’s the best shot at getting this stupid bigoted policy tossed out in a long-lasting way. And if it works, by 2012 no one is going to care and the whole issue will be dead dead dead.

  212. 212
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Let’s just be clear here: You are, here and now, saying that the Democratic leadership had to stop slamming Republicans for not passing a defense appropriation because people like Joseph Nobles forced them to?

    No, I’m saying that they slammed them for it and are continuing to do so, but they’ve been drowned out by the sad cries of the people who were bamboozled by Susan Collins into thinking that any Republican was going to vote for it.

  213. 213
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    What I said was “Obama agreed to have McClurkin at a bunch of his rallies”. Which is true. Obama then agreed to not let McClurkin at his rallies, except for one. Also true.

    Then there was the Rick Warren thing, where he had another anti-gay bigot speak at his inauguration. So does Obama “frequently” allow bigots to share a stage with him? He sure does. It isn’t common at all for a Democrat to do something like this even once.

    @soonergrunt:

    “Well the first part of your ‘solution’ is already done, as has been pointed out previously.”

    When? A Google search for “Obama issue stop loss order” turns up no news.

    @Mnemosyne:

    “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is not actually what gets people thrown out of the military. The fact that it is currently against federal law for gay people to serve in the military is what gets them thrown out. Deciding not to prosecute people for being gay in the military is not the same thing as making it legal.”

    Remember, at the start of the Gulf War in 1991–before there even was a DADT–president George H. Bush signed a stop-loss order suspending the discharge of gay troops.

    “And when President Palin takes over and directs her DoJ to pick the case back up again?”

    F**k her. She doesn’t even know what the Department of Justice is–literally*. And if some future president decides to take us backward, the intervening years will still have been much better for gay Americans currently in the military.

    I dont’ want a Republican president. The way to avoid that is for Obama to fight for what his base wants and show voters that he is worth supporting.

    “And yet for some reason I’m an evil homophobe ”

    I do not believe you are that, and nor should anyone else here.

    *http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/07/palin-department-of-law-p_n_226881.html

  214. 214

    @FlipYrWhig:

    I’m gonna go with “when the must-pass defense bill comes back up for a vote.”

    Yes, when the Democratic majority is even smaller thanks to Senators Raese and Kirk? Yeah, you keep telling me about how I’m just being nelly about my schedule.

  215. 215
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    “they’ve been drowned out by the sad cries of the people who were bamboozled by Susan Collins into thinking that any Republican was going to vote for it. ”

    Doesn’t that statement apply to the president as well? What I mean is: he based his entire strategy on this on getting 60 votes in the Senate. I didn’t think that was going to happen, and it sounds like you didn’t either.

  216. 216
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Joseph Nobles:
    That’s weird, because this is what you said in your comment #134 right here on this thread:

    The DADT repeal was one vote away from happening in the Senate. All Democrats plus the two Independents that caucus with them had voted for it. Did President Obama pick up the phone and call Susan Collins? No. In fact, he called no one. It died.

    It’s very odd to me that you switched from calling this Susan Collins’ “Dred Scott moment” to saying here that it would have passed if Obama had personally called Collins.

  217. 217
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @lamh32:

    “It’s 2010. Please find and name the times in ‘08 that Obama was “campaigining” with McClurken. I bet u won’t find more than 1”

    You’re right, I probably won’t.

  218. 218
    John Cole says:

    Beyond the fact that I will NEVER EVER EVER understand why DADT became the gold standard for gay rights (ENDA and DOMA seem far more important), what infuriates me to no end that there is never any acknowledgment of those things Obama has done- Matthew Shepard Act, EO regarding hospital visitation, extending benefits to federal employees, and numerous other things, on top of being a vocal supporter for gay rights.

    But we’ve got pinheads like Nobles and Oscar Leroy in here taking the position that not only has he done nothing, but he is WORSE than the people who put these laws in place and who actively ran on GAY-BASHING platforms. It is just stunning.

    Why the fuck is there not an around the clock vigil on Scott Brown screaming “Scott Brown’s a bigot! Scott Brown’s a bigot! and HOMOPHOBE! HOMOPHOBE!” every single time he is in public? There aren’t enough gay people and people supportive of gay rights in the Boston area to make this happen? Same with the snow queens in Maine and every other Senator who voted against DADT.

    Probably everyone is too busy making up their own bullshit in website comments about how awful Obama is to actually figure out who the true enemy to the gay community is- the GOP.

  219. 219
    soonergrunt says:

    @Oscar Leroy:
    The President cannot issue a stop-loss order that makes part of the UCMJ non-functional.
    National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 made it the official policy of the United States Government that “Homosexuality is incompatible with military service.”
    The specific laws are Title 10 and Title 32, USCode.
    Then there’s Article I of the Constitution which says that Congress makes the laws.

  220. 220
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    F**k her. She doesn’t even know what the Department of Justice is—literally*.

    And that will stop the Republicans she appoints to the DoJ and the DoD from reversing the repeal … how, again?

    And if some future president decides to take us backward, the intervening years will still have been much better for gay Americans currently in the military.

    Yes, because that’s going to be comforting to people who just had their civil rights ripped away from them — “Hey, you got to have them for a short period of time! What are you complaining about?”

  221. 221
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    saying here that it would have passed if Obama had personally called Collins.

    This is a key point that drives so much disappointment in Obama: so many times he doesn’t even try. If he had lobbied hard to get votes, if he had gone across Capitol Hill and twisted arms, if he had done some LBJ-style vote wranglin’, then even if he had failed people would still understand that he gave it his best shot, and be heartened by his effort. And who knows–he might have won! Crazier things have happened.

    Instead, now people just laugh at him when he calls himself a “fierce advocate”.

  222. 222
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    does Obama “frequently” allow bigots to share a stage with him?

    Two events out of how ever many hundreds is frequent now? Why don’t you just admit that your real issue is that he chose to have anti-gay people at two events, one of which was high-profile? That’s true. That can be bad enough. But that’s not all you want it to prove. You want it to prove that there’s a pattern, because that will show that Obama has a deeper issue with gay people than would be otherwise apparent from a campaign gaffe (both of which I’d probably chalk up to “evangelical outreach” rather than specifically “antigay” anyway, but at least that’s an actual debate). But there isn’t a pattern.

    It isn’t common at all for a Democrat to do something like this even once.

    Ever heard of Billy Graham?

  223. 223
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Remember, at the start of the Gulf War in 1991—before there even was a DADT—president George H. Bush signed a stop-loss order suspending the discharge of gay troops.

    Take a look at the date of the law that soonergrunt references in comment #219. Note that it is dated after 1991.

    Do you think that maybe — just maybe — the fact that the law changed between 1991 and today might have a little something to do with the fact that Obama would have a much harder time doing what Bush I did given that the law is different now than the one Bush I was operating under? Or is that another one of the little details you don’t want to bother your beautiful mind with?

  224. 224
    CDWard says:

    Obama likes LGBT people so much he opposes marriage equality and personally picked LGBT genocide advocate Rick Warren to speak at his inauguration.

  225. 225

    @John Cole: Thanks, John Cole. I’m gone. Fuck you very much as well.

  226. 226
    Holden Pattern says:

    @John Cole:

    Beyond the fact that I will NEVER EVER EVER understand why DADT became the gold standard for gay rights (ENDA and DOMA seem far more important)

    We live in a militarized, militaristic society. Military service is now the gold standard for patriotism. No service = “not as good as the REAL patriots.” So for gay people, DADT (and the prohibition on their service generally) means that given the current worship of militarism in our culture, they’re not even permitted to be REAL patriots.

    Reduce the militarism, and DADT becomes far less meaningful. I don’t see the former happening any time soon, so the latter becomes important.

  227. 227
    soonergrunt says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    @See post #138 or look at the Army Times homepage today, the DoD’s homepage today, read the article By Anne Flaherty from the Associated Press, turn on NPR, look at MSNBC or CNN, like I did to get that information in the first place. It wasn’t hard to find.

  228. 228
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Joseph Nobles:

    when the Democratic majority is even smaller thanks to Senators Raese and Kirk?

    But you can pull the same bit on them! “You really want to be seen Playing Politics With Our Troops In A Time Of War?” “You hate gay people that much that you’re willing to go against the stated wishes of the US military, the most powerful, best-prepared, goodest bestest fighting force the world has ever known?” It’s not an easy argument to win, I know, but that’s how this was supposed to play: put Republicans on the spot and make them look bad. That’s why it’s all folded into the defense bill rather than being a stand-alone bill that wouldn’t have unanimous Democratic support. It was a pretty solid strategy until people, even someone as sharp as Rachel Maddow, decided to blame Obama for it instead of letting it be the big fight that exposed bigotry and put Republicans on the record looking bad and blah blah blah like everyone on the so-called left always professes to want from every battle _but_ this one.

  229. 229
    Oscar Leroy says:

    SANTA BARBARA, CA, May 11, 2009 – A study released by the Palm Center and written by a team of military law experts shows that the president has the legal authority to end gay discharges with a single order.

    . . The second and third bases of presidential authority are contained within the “don’t ask, don’t tell” legislation itself. The law grants to the Defense Department authority to determine the process by which discharges will be carried out, saying they will proceed “under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense… in accordance with procedures set forth in such regulation.” Finally, the law calls for the discharge of service members “if” a finding of homosexuality is made, but it does not require that such a finding ever be made. According to the study, these provisions mean that the Pentagon, not Congress, has the “authority to devise and implement the procedures under which those findings may be made.”

    The entire thing is worth reading.

    New Study: Obama Can Halt Gay Discharges With Executive Order

    Obviously the “halt” would NOT be permanent.

  230. 230
    Ash Can says:

    Obama-Hates-Gays threads: Very tiresome, or Most Tiresome Ever?

  231. 231
    Paula says:

    @John Cole:

    Apparently ENDA is “less likely to pass” at this particular moment in time, per some anti-DADT folk online.

  232. 232
    John Cole says:

    @Joseph Nobles: I wish you would get this angry at Republicans and the people who vote against you.

  233. 233
    soonergrunt says:

    @soonergrunt: Oh, and there was the whole “Sodomy is illegal” thing in the UCMJ for like 50+ years which described any sexual activity other than heterosexual genital to genital contact as sodomy, and which was used right up until the 1980s to put gay people into prison in the military, and then later until DADT was used to force them out of the military without any veterans benefits or service credit or anything else.

  234. 234
    Dr. Squid says:

    @John Cole:

    Probably everyone is too busy making up their own bullshit in website comments about how awful Obama is to actually figure out who the true enemy to the gay community is- the GOP.

    Even dumbass old me knows that I’d rather deal with disappointingly slow progress from the Dems than getting actively shot at by the baggers.

  235. 235
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    This is a key point that drives so much disappointment in Obama: so many times he doesn’t even try. If he had lobbied hard to get votes

    Oh my God, this again. How about getting DADT repealed by crafting a strategy through the Secretary of Defense who has been held over since the Republican president, thereby ensuring that the change-averse military is on board? That way the legislators on your side can yoke a divisive social issue to something patriotic and hard to oppose, and can have enough cover to come around to a more liberal position than their advisors and instincts typically tell them to embrace. And they end up one vote short but won’t compromise, won’t pull the plug, and won’t let the whole thing be poisoned by goofball amendments.

    No, that doesn’t count, because John Aravosis et al can caricature it as “just another study” and “not even trying.”

  236. 236
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Obviously the “halt” would NOT be permanent.

    Which is kind of a major element of what this entire conversation is premised on: the tactical difference in going for a full repeal to permanently eliminate the law or just signing a stop-loss, which would not produce any substantive long-term change.

    But thanks for pointing that out.

  237. 237
    Dr. Squid says:

    @Ash Can: Why no! It’s time for a Palestine-Israel thread!

  238. 238
    Holden Pattern says:

    Even dumbass old me knows that I’d rather deal with disappointingly slow progress from the Dems than getting actively shot at by the baggers.

    But what’s important is that you be really really obsequiously thankful for both the slow progress and the occasional backhands to the face that accompany it (which are necessary in order to reassure the retrograde amcons who will never vote for a Dem anyway).

  239. 239
    soonergrunt says:

    @Holden Pattern: You know what? When the total number of serving personnel is somewhat more than 0.3% of the whole population, and 40% of those who do serve are no longer eligible for public assistance because they’re being paid a living wage above the poverty level, and the average servicemember and his/her family don’t live in the hovels we call family housing, then I’ll believe the “militarism and militaristic society” crap.

    It probably has something to do with the idea that if gay people can serve openly then any argument against giving them full membership in society and polity pretty much melts away as untenable and immoral.

  240. 240
    Dr. Squid says:

    @Blue Neponset:

    No, you brought up the AIDS crisis as a comparative example to illustrate what you believe to be the Obama Administration’s inactivity and inattention to LGBT issues.

    I did? I stopped reading after that. Welcome to the ignore list.

    A generation or two of gay men watched their friends and loved ones die from AIDS while the gov’t response was ‘not ask quick as some would like’. If you expect them to sit by quietly again then you expect too much.

    Way to contradict yourself, nipplechips.

  241. 241
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Joseph Nobles:

    Yes, when the Democratic majority is even smaller thanks to Senators Raese and Kirk?

    No, during the lame duck session, because the DoD bill MUST be passed before the end of the year or the military will not have a dime starting January 1st.

    As I said in another thread, my real fear here is that the Democrats back down and take the repeal out of the DoD budget bill, which would send us back to square 1. If they stand firm, I think they can get one of the retiring Republicans to blink and vote to get past the filibuster.

  242. 242
    IrmaLaDuce says:

    @John Cole

    The all consuming obsession with DADT is all about gay men showing the world they aren’t all a bunch of nelly drag queens. That’s why men like Dan Choi are elevated to prominence even though it’s lesbians who are most targeted, and even though their are a whole lotta professions in which the LGBT can’t “serve openly” without losing their jobs.
    The current “gay rights movement” is largely headed by men chiefly concerned with proving their manliness.

  243. 243
    Holden Pattern says:

    @soonergrunt: Oh, come on, man. It’s all about symbolism. I know that we treat actual service members like shit, but look at how much we spend on our military — and how we can’t actually reduce that amount — and how we’ve turned military service into the most central and unchallengeable symbol for sacrifice and honor in our national narrative.

    Conservatives don’t really like actual military personnel, but they’ve successfully turned militarism into part of the national religion. And DADT takes that away from them in part.

  244. 244
    Holden Pattern says:

    @soonergrunt: Oh, come on, man. It’s all about symbolism. I know that we treat actual service members like shit, but look at how much we spend on our military — and how we can’t actually reduce that amount — and how we’ve turned military service into the most central and unchallengeable symbol for sacrifice and honor in our national narrative.

    Conservatives don’t really like actual military personnel, but they’ve successfully turned militarism into part of the national religion. And DADT takes that away from them in part.

  245. 245
    smiley says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Obama often associates with anti-gay religious figures like Donnie McClurkin

    Common man, guilt by association is Glenn Beck’s gig.

  246. 246
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @John Cole:

    LOL at John. “Duh, me no understand what happening here, but other peoples are stoopid!”

    I will NEVER EVER EVER understand why DADT became the gold standard for gay rights

    Who said it is? Seriously, who? Anyway, what draws this issue so frequently front and center is that it would be so easy for Obama to do something about it. He has not one but 2 balls in his court. Yet he wants someone else to handle it.

    ENDA and DOMA seem far more important

    They probably are. Too bad Obama is just as bad on these issues as on DADT. Here’s just a taste of his administration’s defense of DOMA:

    “State courts may refuse to give effect to a marriage, or to certain incidents of a marriage, that contravene the forum State’s policy. See, e.g., Catalano v. Catalano, 170 A.2d 726, 728-29 (Conn. 1961) (marriage of uncle to niece, “though valid in Italy under its laws, was not valid in Connecticut because it contravened the public policy of that state”)”

    That will win friends, won’t it?

    Matthew Shepard Act, EO regarding hospital visitation, extending benefits to federal employees

    He’s done some good things, but it’s not nearly enough. “Not enough” is not enough.

    but he is WORSE than the people who put these laws in place and who actively ran on GAY-BASHING platforms.

    Who said THAT? Someone said that Obama doesn’t believe in gay marriage, but Dick Cheney does. That’s a fact. Don’t like it? Don’t blame anyone here.

    Why the fuck is there not an around the clock vigil on Scott Brown screaming “Scott Brown’s a bigot! Scott Brown’s a bigot! and HOMOPHOBE! HOMOPHOBE!” every single time he is in public?

    What leverage do we have over people like that? They don’t give a crap about liberals. They won’t listen to us. The president, on the other hand, has a lot of leverage.

    Probably everyone is too busy making up their own bullshit in website comments about how awful Obama is to actually figure out who the true enemy to the gay community is- the GOP.

    Yeah, it’s not like Obama promised to end stuff like DADT before the end of this year! Oh wait, he did.

  247. 247
    different church-lady says:

    @Midnight Marauder:

    what are people like this going to do if and when the DADT repeal happens in the Senate as was intended all along?

    That’s an easy one — the line will be “The senate had the courage to do what Obama wouldn’t.”

    I think I’m starting to see the problem here — people want Obama to be an advocate for the LGBT community, and anything less than makes him then enemy. Merely doing things is not enough.

  248. 248
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @IrmaLaDuce:

    Haha! I assume you’re proud you wrote that. I’m not gay, by the way.

    @FlipYrWhig:

    That’s worked well so far, hasn’t it?

    @John Cole:

    @Joseph Nobles: I wish you would get this angry at Republicans and the people who vote against you.

    Haha! Why do you wish that? What good would getting angry do? Turn him into a big green monster who could SMASH the Republicans? “Don’t be angry at my guy, be angry at their guy! Pretty please!”

  249. 249
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    but he is WORSE than the people who put these laws in place and who actively ran on GAY-BASHING platforms.
    __
    Who said THAT? Someone said that Obama doesn’t believe in gay marriage, but Dick Cheney does. That’s a fact. Don’t like it? Don’t blame anyone here.

    Wait, you’re now claiming that Cheney didn’t run on a gay-bashing platform and that Bush didn’t win in 2004 because they carefully orchestrated a series of anti-gay-marriage initiatives across the country? Because that’s the only way you can claim it’s a “fact” that Cheney supports gay marriage but Obama doesn’t.

    Can’t you at least keep your claims straight within a single thread?

  250. 250
    smiley says:

    @smiley: Um, I meant come on man.

  251. 251
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Yeah, it’s not like Obama promised to end stuff like DADT before the end of this year! Oh wait, he did.

    And he got within 1 vote of it, and there’s still the lame duck Senate session to go. Unless you think the year ends on Oct. 31, it looks to me like he still has another couple of months to keep his word.

    Funny how people keep saying they’d be happy with a noble loss if the cause is important enough and then go ballistic when they, you know, lose.

  252. 252
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @soonergrunt:

    look at the Army Times homepage today, the DoD’s homepage today, read the article By Anne Flaherty from the Associated Press, turn on NPR, look at MSNBC or CNN, like I did to get that information in the first place. It wasn’t hard to find.

    Yup, I looked. All that stuff is a result of Obama’s foolish appeal of the court’s decision, which he should withdraw.

    @Midnight Marauder:

    the tactical difference in going for a full repeal to permanently eliminate the law or just signing a stop-loss, which would not produce any substantive long-term change.

    Well, I guess we can’t do both because. . . it’s thursday?

  253. 253
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    “And he got within 1 vote of it”

    Which counts for a lot!

  254. 254

    @Mnemosyne: One last note to you – Raese and Kirk will be sat in the lame duck session.

    And to John, if you’d read the damn thread before jumping in with your O’Reilly labels, I am a hell of a lot angrier at Susan Collins than Barack Obama.

    That said, I don’t have a place here other than “next firebagger in a barrel” even though the only blog I can stand to read at FireDogLake is Tbogg’s. So, fuck you again, John Cole. Goodbye.

  255. 255
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    “Or is that another one of the little details you don’t want to bother your beautiful mind with? ”

    You: “It’s foolish to put your trust in someone like Susan Collins”

    Me: “It’s foolish to put your trust in someone like Susan Collins”

    Why are we arguing?

  256. 256
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Joseph Nobles:

    And to John, if you’d read the damn thread before jumping in with your O’Reilly labels

    That’s not fair, because John Cole was never the kind of person who would listen to. . . oh.

  257. 257
    Midnight Marauder says:

    @Joseph Nobles:

    @Mnemosyne: One last note to you – Raese and Kirk will be sat in the lame duck session.

    Why the fuck are you so certain that Mark Kirk is going to win? His campaign has been taking scandal after scandal the past few weeks, and Giannoulis has more than a clear chance at taking the seat.

    But that doesn’t help you push your narrative about impending Democratic failure, now does it?

  258. 258
    Paula says:

    @ruemara: just 40-odd more to go! You can DO IT, folks!

  259. 259
    Joe Beese says:

    [golf clap]

  260. 260
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Which counts for a lot!

    Apparently not, since you’re enraged that it didn’t pass and want to do something, anything so you can have instant gratification. Who cares if 10 years from now gay people are thrown out of the military because the law was never invalidated? You’ll get what you wanted right fucking now!

    Why are we arguing?

    Because you apparently think that Susan Collins is the only Republican member of the Senate and if she can’t be gotten, then there’s absolutely no one else who could be.

    My point is that Collins’ reputation as the Last Honest Republican is as overblown as Joe Lieberman’s rep as the Last Honest Man is and that it would be much more productive to focus on someone else. Your point seems to be that Susan Collins is the be-all and end-all of everything and if she won’t vote for it, we may as well give up and go home.

  261. 261

    @taylormattd: Thanks for the kind words, but FDL used to be #1 on the Most Hated Sites of the Hillary Fans because neither Jane nor most of FDL’s writers ever bought into the idea that the two candidates were such polar opposites as their partisans often claimed. If there was more than a sliver of daylight between the two’s political stances, Obama would never have made her his SoS.

    I used to get into keyboard sparring matches with Hillary fans all the time — as an Edwards backer (and boy am I glad he didn’t make it past New Hampshire, for all practical purposes) I used to drive them nuts putting up polling results showing that she would lose, usually horribly, to almost any but the weakest third- or fourth-string Republican candidates. Here’s an example: http://firedoglake.com/2008/01.....uch-about/

  262. 262
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Midnight Marauder:

    I’m not sure why Raese is supposed to be a lock, either. The recent poll that showed him up by 2 points had a 5-point margin of error, so it was pretty much completely useless.

  263. 263
    Oscar Leroy says:

    If you’re going to build your dreams on having a Republican—especially a self-described “moderate” Republican—actually do something that might help a Democratic president, you should probably give up having dreams at all.

    A few posts ago, someone wrote this and I thought it was very well said.

  264. 264
    lol says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    Obama wasn’t at and was never scheduled to be at the concert McClurkin sang at. So he never appeared on stage with McClurkin. It’s just part of the historical revisionism the empty set left routinely engages in where Obama is concerned.

    Remember how Obama campaigned for Joe Lieberman against Lamont in the general election? And by “campaigned”, I mean “said some nice things about him at a Democratic party fundraiser months before Lamont was a factor in the primary”.

    Remember how the Netroots delivered the nomination for Obama? And by “delivered the nomination for” I mean “wrote political obituaries for the campaign of just before the caucuses”.

  265. 265
    Paula says:

    lol @lol

  266. 266
    soonergrunt says:

    @Oscar Leroy:
    Either you are the dumbest motherfucker around or you are the biggest asshole around.
    Lo and behold, the second paragraph of the Army Times article, titled Secretaries must now OK DADT separations, free for viewing:

    According to the rules issued by Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Thursday, only the service secretaries can authorize a separation under the law, and the secretaries have to consult with the Defense Department’s top attorney and the undersecretary for Defense for Personnel and Readiness.

    And the second paragraph of Anne Flaherty’s AP article which is all over the fucking web including MSNBC:

    Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Thursday ordered that all dismissals under the 1993 law be decided by one of the four service secretaries in consultation with the military’s general counsel and Gates’ personnel chief.

    Or the FIRST pargraph of the CNN article:

    Defense Secretary Robert Gates has raised the level at which gay and lesbian troops can be discharged under the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, ordering that it only be done by the secretaries of the Army, Navy and Air Force, a senior Defense Department attorney said Thursday.

    Links omitted because FYWP’s three link maximum including the reply button link.

  267. 267
    Bruce (formerly Steve S.) says:

    Really, read the comments to this D-Day post.

    Jesus, are you trolling the comments section of another blog looking for material to piss you off again? Why do you waste your time? Should a front-pager at FDL troll the more ridiculous commentary on Balloon Juice and write a blog post about it? Is it a slow news day or something?

  268. 268
    John Cole says:

    @Joseph Nobles: I apologize. I was being a jerk.

  269. 269
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    And … ? The point was that a Republican was not going to vote in favor of gay rights because it’s the right thing to do, no matter how much lip service they pay to it before the vote.

    Convincing a Republican to vote in favor of the military having money next year is not the same thing, even if this year’s vote also happens to benefit gay and lesbian servicemembers. You’re actually much more likely to pick up a Dick Lugar with that argument than you are trying to get Susan Collins to vote on the basis of equal rights.

  270. 270
    NR says:

    You know, it is possible to acknowledge the fact that Obama did a good thing by making this video while also acknowledging the fact that his overall record on gay rights leaves much to be desired. Just a thought.

  271. 271
    eemom says:

    @Phoenix Woman:

    what a bunch of horseshit, as usual. Yes, FDL loudly trumpeted its so-called “neutrality”, but it was kind of obvious to anyone with a third-grade reading level that Jane was a Hill shill to the bone (for reasons I have no doubt were motivated by self interest).

    You know — things like calling anyone who said boo to Hillary a “misogynist” — and, of course, banning them immediately thereafter. That kind of thing.

    Tell me something, PW — why DO you spend your life trolling other blogs in support of Jane Hamsher? It’s really kinda weird — unless she is, in fact, paying you.

  272. 272
    TooManyJens says:

    I don’t think it’s mockworthy to say “a lot of gay kids didn’t feel like they had anybody who loved them when they were growing up.” I do think it’s mockworthy, or at least ridiculous, to say “so you shouldn’t tell kids that they do.”

  273. 273
    soonergrunt says:

    @Joseph Nobles:
    @Joseph Nobles:

    I’m gone….Goodbye

    That word does not mean what you seem to think it means.
    I mean to say that usually when somebody says ‘goodbye’ they LEAVE afterwards.

  274. 274
    Uncle Clarence Thomas says:

    .
    .
    All wise people understand that genuine progress always begins with lip service from President Obama.

    .
    .

  275. 275
    batgirl says:

    @NR: Stop being reasonable. Don’t you know you are commenting on a blog?

  276. 276
    Lynn Dee says:

    These people deserve a Republican House and Senate.

    Yep. That they do. And then when they get it, it’ll be Obama’s fault.

  277. 277
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @soonergrunt:

    Here’s the problem with calling people “stupid”: I said that Obama should sign an executive order stopping enforcement of DADT. Then you come along and say “That has already happened!”

    “Where did you see that?” I say.

    “Here” you say, and list a whole bunch of websites that don’t mention an executive order.

    Where in that AP article or that CNN article or that Army Times article is a stop-loss order even alluded to?

    Where?

  278. 278
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @John Cole:

    Just in time, too!

    You are so much better than the FireDogLake people, who get angry and call people names and forget who is really on their side!

  279. 279
    les says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    Oscar me lad, what’s really stupid is your willingness to be really assertive and really wrong at the same time.

  280. 280
    soonergrunt says:

    @soonergrunt: I really kind of wish I hadn’t been quite so assinine there.

  281. 281
    Bobby Thomson says:

    @NR:

    You know, it is possible to acknowledge the fact that Obama did a good thing by making this video while also acknowledging the fact that his overall record on gay rights leaves much to be desired. Just a thought.

    This.

  282. 282
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @Uncle Clarence Thomas:

    Can you introduce us to Long Dong Silver?

  283. 283
    les says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    The stupid is strong in this one. Do you know what DADT is? It’s an executive order that says, “even though the law of the land prohibits gays from serving in the military, the military is not to seek out and dismiss gays.” So you think Obama should issue a “stop loss” order (what the fuck do you think that means in this context?) ending DADT. So that the military can go back to actively seeking out gays, to dismiss them. Did I mention you’re an idiot?

  284. 284
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @les:

    Wow, that’s a strong argument you make. So many facts and chains of logical conclusions to digest. That will take a while.

    Nice blog you got here, John.

  285. 285
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @les:

    LOL. That’s a new one.

  286. 286
    soonergrunt says:

    @Oscar Leroy: The fact that you care more about the forms than the effects, and your stubborn refusal to see that you’re getting what you claim to want simply because there wasn’t a rose-garden ceremony pretty much makes you stupid.
    I’m sorry about that. Really.
    Listen, since homosexual people can’t be put out of the service now with anything short of what is damn near an act of God, and it’s a safe bet that you won’t have to worry about a DADT discharge for either that reason or because it doesn’t apply to you, when are you going to sign up?

  287. 287
    Oscar Leroy says:

    @soonergrunt:

    First rule of getting out of a hole: stop digging.

  288. 288
    les says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    New to you, apparently. In the real world it’s old; it was Clinton’s “compromise” to deal with a Republican congress passing a law barring gays from the military. Would you care to point out where I’m inaccurate? There’s a party for the deliberately ignorant–perhaps you should hang with the TeaTards–they don’t let reality interfere with their dream world, either.

  289. 289
    different church-lady says:

    @NR: –blinks–

    Wait, did you just try to post a thought on the internet, instead of a reaction?

  290. 290

    @John Cole: Thank you. So was I, and I apologize as well. And I had forgotten about the Matthew Shepherd Act and the other things. So I will apologize about that also.

    I don’t know how a DADT repeal became the gold standard (which it’s not – that and ENDA and gay marriage would be the gold standard, it’s more like a bronze standard), but I know how I personally view the situation. That’s the only “narrative” I’m pushing. And as a proud gay man and lifelong Democrat, I would be more comfortable touting Obama’s and the Democrats’ record on gay issues if at least DADT had been repealed. And I’m here to tell you all that crying “firebagger” and letting slip the digs of war isn’t going to change that for a lot of people like me. If I have to eat a shit sandwich, I will not smile and apologize about that.

  291. 291
    soonergrunt says:

    @Oscar Leroy: So put your shovel down.

  292. 292
    soonergrunt says:

    @Joseph Nobles:

    letting slip the digs of war

    awesome.

  293. 293
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Joseph Nobles:

    And as a proud gay man and lifelong Democrat, I would be more comfortable touting Obama’s and the Democrats’ record on gay issues if at least DADT had been repealed.

    Not to get all Mark Twain on you, but rumors of its death have been greatly exaggerated.

    That is why I’m getting all nutsy and pushy: it’s not actually dead. And it’s driving me nuts that people are walking around insisting that all is lost when a few more pushes could actually get us over the top.

  294. 294
    Darkrose says:

    @Holden Pattern:

    Of course, Obama did NOT support Prop 8, but the No on 8 campaign didn’t mention that, just like they didn’t seriously consider reaching out to communities of color to actually counter any of the other side’s messenging.

    Prop 8 passed because its opponents didn’t have our shit together.

  295. 295
    Darkrose says:

    @lamh32: Well duh! Everyone like Andrew Sullivan knows that black people are 20,000% more homophobic than white people, and that by extension, black GLBT people are as mythical as unicorns.

  296. 296
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Darkrose:

    Prop 8 passed because its opponents didn’t have our shit together.

    Yep, yep and yep. I still can’t believe the TV commercials the No on 8 campaign was running up until a couple of months before the election, which were basically, It’s okay for you to be homophobic as long as you let us get married! Who the hell wrote those pieces of shit, and why didn’t they have that Samuel Jackson-narrated commercial on sooner than 2 weeks before the motherfucking election?

    ETA: Also, I must have imagined those robocalls I was getting from candidate Obama before the election urging me to vote against Prop 8 since he’s so anti-gay and all.

  297. 297
    Hawes says:

    Interestingly, there was still some residual praise for Hillary over there (if Bill was America’s first black President, I guess they thought HIllary would have been America’s first Lesbian President?).

    And yet neither Obama nor Clinton ran very hard on LGBT issues beyond trying to rollback DADT. Neither of them said boo that I can remember on DOMA.

    You can argue that Obama has been timid on the issue, but I don’t think he broke any promises to anyone.

    Or am I being too rational?

  298. 298
    General JAFO Willibro says:

    @Fergus Wooster: And thanks for that. I’m much more interested in what Savage has to say on this as opposed to say, a buncha of (mostly) straight BJ Obots.

  299. 299
    soonergrunt says:

    @General JAFO Willibro: So you’re just trolling here then. Got it.

  300. 300
    tomvox1 says:

    The good part is that there are like 5 regular commenters left over there after the “Let’s all give Norquist a rimjob!” episode. They are poisonous but WGAS?

  301. 301
    scandi says:

    Quit clapping, John. Tinkerbelle is dead.

  302. 302
    Nick says:

    @Holden Pattern:

    perhaps you could consider all of the people in California who heard over and over again “but even President Obama doesn’t support same-sex marriage” during the hateful lie-filled campaign for Proposition 8.

    and if the anti-Prop 8 campaign did anything but coast to Election Day, you would’ve heard President Obama say over and over again how he opposes Prop 8

  303. 303

    Obama snuffed out my hope in the political process.

    But that might be a good thing.

  304. 304
    Nick says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    It isn’t a permanent fix, of course, but I really, really think that gay servicemembers would rather have that than noting.

    They would rather run the risk of being court martialed for being gay?

  305. 305
    Uncle Clarence Thomas says:

    @Oscar Leroy:

    You mean like up close and personal? Well, you probably don’t have to get that close — that mofo really can legislate all the way from the bench… Respect.

    Anyhoozle, there’s a new sheriff in town — Longest Dong Obsidian. Ginni loves him.

  306. 306

    It would also be perfectly legal for him to tell his Department of Justice not to defend DADT in court. In case you haven’t heard, courts are allowed to declare a law unconstitutional.

    Obama works in the executive branch, not the judicial branch. Also: Obama works in the executive branch, not the legislative branch. There are 3 branches of government, and Obama only works in one of them!

    Seriously dude, please take the time to read this, or some other basic explanation of what the different branches of government are. Your 6th grade civics teacher is dying of shame right about now.

  307. 307
    Ron says:

    @Trinity:

    He ain’t perfect but I’m still damn glad that he’s our President.
    F the Firebaggers.

    This. +1.

  308. 308
    Uncle Clarence Thomas says:

    @Ron:
    @Trinity
    .
    .

    F the Firebaggers

    I don’t understand why you two want to Fellate the Firebaggers.

    .
    .

  309. 309
    The Raven says:

    I think this is like getting flowers after being jilted. Well…the flowers are nice. But they don’t make up for being jilted.

  310. 310
    JamesC says:

    You know, I’m just browsing through the comments a bit, and quite frankly I’ve been too tired, sick and employed lately to concentrate much on the current political scene… but it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to me to get so worked up cannibalizing the nominally sympathetic, or at least not actively hostile, side of the aisle when there’s so much more work to be done to discredit and defang the actively hostile Right.

    Could the Obama Administration be doing a whole lot more to equalize the rights of our LGBT loved ones? Oh, yes. Indisputably. But I somehow suspect that, as pressing as the issue is for those personally affected by it, or at least in a close relation to those that are, Obama’s idea of the issue’s priority level in relation to everything else afflicting the nation is… not a mirror of that.

    Am I saying that gay rights activists should just take a wait and see approach? No. Protest more. Protest louder. Get that issue out as urgently as you can spin the message. But don’t make the fallacy of projecting your own priorities onto Obama and think that because you are so worked up about it that it must be objectively the most relevant issue of the day, and that a considerate President must agree with you.

    Going a step farther and assuming that if he doesn’t, then he must somehow enjoy thumbing his nose at this crucial civil rights issue, that he must somehow be your enemy… well, that’s very much the sort of thinking that can stir up a nest of teabaggers.

    It shouldn’t be the sort of binary thinking that we, ourselves, embrace.

  311. 311
    AxelFoley says:

    @shecky:

    Like Dan Choi, pledging to not vote for Obama… because President Palin will be such an advocate for gay rights.

    LOL, I know, right? I’m pretty sure the President will be fine without Choi’s vote. And I’m sure we’ll see this dumbass chain himself to the White House gate again. I’d feel more for him if he chained himself up to the real obstacle to ending the banning of gays in the military–Congress. But, no, he goes and targets the person who said many times he’d end that law when Congress gets a bill on his desk

  312. 312
    AxelFoley says:

    @batgirl:

    @Oscar Leroy: As you point out those are “just words.” Tell me concretely what Dick Cheney has actually done.

    BINGO. BING-FUCKIN’-O.

    Notice how many Obama detractors jumped on that shit when Cheney voiced his “support” of gay marriage, but what has that muthafucka done since then? And why didn’t that fuckin’ bastard do anything about it, oh I don’t know, WHEN HE WAS IN OFFICE?

    No, they just keep moving those goal posts.

  313. 313
    Mnemosyne says:

    @JamesC:

    Honestly, I think it’s the classic “drunk searching for keys under lamppost” move. Trying to get conservatives or Republicans to move even a tiny bit is really, really, really hard, and you’re lucky to do it at all. But getting, say, Valerie Jarrett to publicly apologize for using the phrase “lifestyle choice” in a speech is incredibly easy, so of course people would rather do that.

    Democrats are much more likely to be responsive to complaints from GLBT people than Republicans are, so of course you’re going to complain more about Democrats so you can feel like something was actually accomplished when they give you what you’re asking for. Trying to get an apology from Republicans is basically bashing your head against a brick wall.

    So I understand the impulse, but the problem is when people decide that the allies who aren’t working fast enough or hard enough for them are THE ENEMY and direct more fire towards them than they do towards, say, Maggie Gallagher of NOM, who really is actively working against gay marriage.

  314. 314
    AxelFoley says:

    @John Cole:

    Beyond the fact that I will NEVER EVER EVER understand why DADT became the gold standard for gay rights (ENDA and DOMA seem far more important), what infuriates me to no end that there is never any acknowledgment of those things Obama has done- Matthew Shepard Act, EO regarding hospital visitation, extending benefits to federal employees, and numerous other things, on top of being a vocal supporter for gay rights.
    But we’ve got pinheads like Nobles and Oscar Leroy in here taking the position that not only has he done nothing, but he is WORSE than the people who put these laws in place and who actively ran on GAY-BASHING platforms. It is just stunning.
    Why the fuck is there not an around the clock vigil on Scott Brown screaming “Scott Brown’s a bigot! Scott Brown’s a bigot! and HOMOPHOBE! HOMOPHOBE!” every single time he is in public? There aren’t enough gay people and people supportive of gay rights in the Boston area to make this happen? Same with the snow queens in Maine and every other Senator who voted against DADT.
    Probably everyone is too busy making up their own bullshit in website comments about how awful Obama is to actually figure out who the true enemy to the gay community is- the GOP.

    Might be an overused term now, but–This.

  315. 315
    AxelFoley says:

    @Joe Beese:

    [middle finger]

Comments are closed.