It wouldn’t be a day of the week if John Aravosis wasn’t drawing absurd conclusions from something someone associated with President Obama had done the day before.
Yesterday, it was John’s remarkable statement that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was enunciating the Obama Administration’s “3/5ths a man” solution to Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. This is, of course, an astounding statement referencing the U.S. Constitution’s statement prior to the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment that “all other Persons” — slaves — were to be counted as 3/5ths a person.
In reality, though, Gates was saying that the Pentagon was looking at ways to do exactly what Rep. Alcee Hastings and 76 other members of Congress asked the Administration to do. But for John, doing exactly what advocates asked him to do last week is not good enough this week if it doesn’t fit John’s narrative that the Obama Administration wants nothing to do with us. [And, as I state in comments, "Sec. Gates made clear that his statements were in the context of “discussing legal parameters for a repeal and interim steps before Congress passes legislation changing the policy."]
Today, John attacks Steve Hildebrand, an openly gay man who helped run Obama’s campaign. Hildebrand wrote in The Huffington Post:
There are three critically important pieces of legislation that should pass Congress and move to the president’s desk immediately. You were elected on a promise to help people — to make a difference in people’s lives. Because discrimination is unacceptable, you should move forward now to pass the Safe Schools Improvement Act, the National Hate Crimes Prevention Act and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.
By stating this, in a piece critical of Obama and Congress for their lack of action on LGBT legislative issues thus far, John concludes:
The new Obama talking points don’t even include DOMA and Don’t Ask Don’t Tell as priorities any longer.
. . . .
After two weeks of the Obama White House reeling over the gay backlash caused by the anti-gay DOMA brief, which compared gay marriage to incest and pedophilia, we now have the number two guy on the Obama campaign suddenly writing about what our legislative priorities should be. Don’t think for a minute that this essay wasn’t either written by the White House, written at their behest, or at the very least cleared with them. This essay is the White House’s thinking on gay issues.
No, John, that is not what Hildebrand was writing. He was writing about three bills that he believe could pass easily and should be passed immediately. In light of the attacks that Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network founder Kevin Jennings is taking in his nomination to run the Education Department’s Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools, I think the addition of the Safe Schools Improvement Act to Hildebrand’s list of legislation is a positive sign — even if, for some reason, one assumes that Hildebrand’s piece was coordinated in some way with the White House.
Since when does calling for immediate passage of legislation mean that other bills are off the talking points of the Administration? Since when does one person, not in the Administration, stating one goal imply a disavowal of all other goals?
Assuming bad motives when people who like us are doing things that we have asked them to do seems to me to at least be ill-conceived, if not worse.
[RELATED: Adam Serwer, who usually writes at TAPPED, had this excellent piece today at The Atlantic, looking at Obama's actions and words on LGBT equality when compared to Lincoln's actions and words on Emancipation.]
Popularity: 2% [?]
Chris Geidner is a lawyer in Washington, D.C., who writes at Law Dork, is the senior political writer at Metro Weekly and has written for The Atlantic Online, Advocate.com, Salon and other publications. An extended biography can be found
LawDork appears to be prejudiced against ameircablog. In regards to general gate’s comments, he said he was looking into ways to enforce DADT in a more ‘humane’ manner. He noted as one example of persons who were outed by a third party (ie. a jilted lover). This does not remove the offensiveness of the law, nor is it the stop loss order that is requested by gay organizations. Gate’s solution WOULD STILL REQUIRE GAY MEN AND WOMEN TO LIE ABOUT THEIR SEXUALITY to their co-workers and superiors. Peiple such as Lt. Dan Choi would still be subject to trial and expulsion from the military under Gate’s proposal.
There are a number of loopholes within the law that would allow the president or the military to halt application of the law altogether. The best option is for the president to issue a stop loss order. The second option is for the military tribunals to actually elevaluate if discharge is the most prudent solution (as the law requires). If the tribunals were to do what they are actually tasked with doing by the law, they would likely find that it is more damaging for the miliatry to lose top talent than it is to allow a homosexual to stay in the military. This actually is required by the law, and has thus far been ignored completely with the assumption that it’s always better to simply fire the gay person.
You are correct, but Sec. Gates made clear that his statements were in the context of “discussing legal parameters for a repeal and interim steps before Congress passes legislation changing the policy” — and they were directly responsive to the very suggestions put forth in Rep. Hastings letter to Obama the week before.
Context? How DARE you put things into context!
Seriously, again you hit the nail on the head. Rather than tackle easier and still meaningful objectives, there are some who gain more satisfaction from the martyrdom of banging one’s head against a wall. Its clear Obama won’t use executive power to deal with DADT and that he would rather leave the SSM issue to the states.
In that context it makes sense for other action to be taken. I do think Gates 3rd party outting is rather silly, but if they can chip away at the LAW as it stands, then that is progress. Women still aren’t technically allowed in combat units….but they are indeed in combat situations.
I do think its a passive and sorta bullshit way around things.But if thats what it takes to change hundreds of years of military thinking, so be it.
In the meantime, shifting focus to goals that can be accomplished is the right course of action.
Do you guys ever pull muscles or strain tendons contorting yourselves to avoid the reality:
Obama: “I don’t support gay marriage.” Moreover, he comes from a community that overwhelmingly opposes it.
Until he departs that position, he is no different than the Mormons, your self-delusions aside. He’s no friend. How about some self-respect here?
Look, the sad fact is that we thought we needed the gay votes and money, but since Obama went over so big, we didn’t, don’t and won’t need you.
Supporting you would alienate the group that is going to give us a permanent ruling majority: Hispanics.
Once we give the undocumented amnesty, they’re automatic Democratic votes.
Eleven million, plus the families they’ll bring, plus the ones already here compared to a group that’s maybe four percent of the population.
Plus, most of them don’t speak the language so they whine a lot less, frankly.
Do the math.
Mr. X:
What community would that be? The African-American one?
Racist, much?
if the community is the UCC—well they overwhelmingly support it.
To all those who are arguing that Obama’s ‘pro-gay stances’ are a ‘living lie,’ his attacks on the homophobia of the black churches, his Gay Pride proclamation, and all the rest are ’simply politics’ might try and answer why he would bother.
Most of us are alrteady progressives, and even those of us who might have tended towards Republicanism certainly would never have voted for someone with the record of opposing even civil unions that john McCain had (and as for Sarah Palin, none of us are so insane as to think our rights would be safe with her in the White House). We would have ‘held our nose and voted for him’ even if he had declared that he was unwilling to do anything to help our agenda, because we had no other choice.
And now, oh my, why is he continuing to bother? It is obvious there isn’t a Republican visible — except maybe for that one Governor who is ‘one of us’ and has never felt it necessary to pretend homophobia to protect his paper-thin closet door — who would not be far worse for our community than even McCain. Again, he has no need to pander to us, to give anything more than lip service to our concerns — and then ‘behind closed doors’ as did one of his rivals who never mentioned the word gay anywhere else.
He didn’t need to give the Gay Pride Proclamation — and certainly not one that said what it did. He could have argued that DADT was a good idea that was simply badly carried out, and attempted to ‘return it to its original intention.’ He could have remained silent about DOMA, or said ‘the Congress passed it, it’s up to them whether they repeal it.’ He didn’t have to issue a public apology to Frank Kameny — someone I am sure many of the younger people here had not heard of unless they were students of the history of gay rights. He didn’t have to appoint the gays he has to the positions he has, or have Gene Robinson anywheres near Washington during Inauguration week.
He still would have been assured of our votes, because we would have wanted to keep the sort of raging Fundamentalist homophobe that would have been his opponent out of power.
Y’know, I’ve watched a lot of lying politicians, including Nixon, both Bushes, and Reagan, and none of them created the incredible web of deceit that you are convinced Obama is spinning.
One more point, but — again, sorry to play the Old Man card — one paricularly important to someone who has watched the struggle since before Stonewall. If there is one basic, visceral phobia for homophobes it is the fear that ‘gays will influence our children.’ While gay teachers — and even trans teachers — are now relatively common, and their positions are protected by unions and anti-discrimiination laws, I still wonder how readily a gay teacher would come out in a strongly conservative area.
I can’t prove it, but I have the feeling that even people who have come to accept our rights in other areas, who might even support gay marriage and gay soldiers, still have a momentary ‘clutching of the heart’ if they found out their child’s teacher was gay.
And yet, Obama has nominated Kevin Jennings. He didn’t ‘have to’ — afaik there was no major campaign among gay bloggers insisting that the appointment be made — as much as we cheered it when it was. There were ways he could have made use of Jennings’ expertise in other ways, ways that would not open himself up to the fight that is beginning to happen. He could have simply ignored him entirely, and no one would have complained.
Yet he did. That ‘hidden homophobe’ who ‘really hates us’ and is only throwing us ’symbolic victories’ that don’t ‘really mean anything’ all the while he is playing us for our votes, deliberately and unnecessarily pushed the most visceral button of all.
Any Arevosians out there want to give their explanation as to why he did?
Where did our people get so lost on this issue? It’s so disheartening.
John and sometimes Pam are clearly misleading the masses. It’s sad and very telling of the poor leadership in our community
I love reading your take on things especially when its clearly more grounded than the absurd conclusions from someone who obviously relishes the notion that President Obama has abandoned them. I just don’t get that. Obama’s nominating Kevin Jennings is a step forward and shows he’s an ally not the enemy. Is there more he could do? Absolutely. And I won’t let him forget it. But I also want health care for everyone and I’d like it yesterday, thank you very much. Where politics are concerned I am a realist. Yes, we want DADT repealed. Yes, we want Prop 8 overturned. Yes, we want SSM available to everyone.
But just like health care, I may not get everything I want right away or without a fight or at least without taking measures to get my point across.
I sent family and friends (gay and straight) your take on the DoMA brief and it opened some eyes. I’ll continue visiting this website for your opinion and will send as many family and friends here. Law Dork is a voice of reason at a time when the LGBT community really needs as much leadership as they can get.
Kit: I — the passing commenter — made the comments about Jenning, not Chris. As for the rest of your comments, I entirely agree with almost everything you said. I want it all, but I think Obama does to, and as i said in one of my more long-winded comments, I think he has deliberately chosen — for the first six months — to make sure the Republicans had no ’cause’ to rally around until they had driven themselves totally into inanity. (I doubt if he expected the ‘gonadal breakdowns’ of two prominent Republicans, but I doubt if he was surprised.)
Now, he’s much freer to move, both on health care and on our issues, and yes, we have to keep pressuring him — not the same as insulting him and lying about him. But we could have lost both if he did it the wrong way, and a spouse’s visitation rights don’t matter much if the other spouse can’t afford to go to the hospital in the first place.
But if there isn’t movement soon, I’ll be complaining as loudly as anyone — but complaining in a way that might be heard.
Since health care wasn’t mentioned I assume Aravosis believes health care is off the table too?
What community would that be? At best a small majority in the AA community oppose it and that number tracks religiosity. After decades of whipping Christianity into African-Americans it’s a group that takes it the most serious. The law of unintended consequences in action.
Aravosis with his latest post about a murdered soldier shows that he’s more than willing to spin more lies to discredit Obama and that his readers — in the comments — eat it up.
It’s really rather sad and rather scary.
The man isn’t trustworthy. He’s leading gay people down the wrong path — and LGBT people are following him.
Arevosis has, I’m sad to say, turned into the Gay Rush Limbaugh, with an immense audience of ‘dittoheads’ who gladly echo everything he says, regardless of facts.
We don’t need this.
Here’s my post about Aravosis and how he’s twisting August Provost III’s tragic murder into hate for Obama.
Kynn, thank you for a wonderful — if sickening, literally — post. The trouble is that Arevosis has that 144 million site meter and someone like Nan Hunter is still trying to hit 50,000.
I really think what needs to be done — I don’t have a blog to volunteer, the TPM blog is rarely maintained, wouldn’t be suitable, and I haven’t touched my old blogs in 3 years — is for someone who HAS a relatively popular gay-centered blog to create a (hopefully) one-time Carnival contra Arevosis which would contain links to your posts, Chris’ Nan’s, and others as well as discussion. (I’ll even try and write something to be linked to as well.)
Any volunteers?
Sorry for the snarkishness, but…
When is Arevosis going to start demanding Obama produce his birth certificate.
On a MUCH more serious note, if the August Provost story proves to be as it appears (there are other reasons than homophobia for a gay, or for that matter a sailor, to be killed, so I am reserving judgment, but expecting the obvious will be true), this might be a large kick in the rear to Congress to get around to repealing DADT. Even people who are mildly homophobic frequently respond to cases like this, as many did during the Matthew Shepard case.
Sad that this type of action was needed, but sometimes it takes extremists to turn around the minds of people that could have been their allies.
Given the casual religious bigotry (because of course allMormons think the same on ssm, just like all Catholics want to ban abortion), racism (all black people are the same) seems plausible.
I agree, particularly with your last paragraph.
I’ll be right there with you to complain in a way that will not only be heard but will get their attention…
even if it takes donations drying up to their political coffers to get results. Maybe the days of getting the runaround from politicians are over. Congress is just as much to blame as anyone. We’ll see.
What polling shows that Hispanic voters would be alienated?
Oh wait, this was a troll post. N’eer mind.