If you want to complain about Obama's stance on gay marriage

[CTLawGuy]

wait till Nov. 5th and then pressure him and push him to your heart's content, threaten him with a primary in 2012 if you want...

but until then you have two choices (1) Obama, (2) fascism, and I don't know about you, but I REALLY REALLY don't want to live under fascism...

I would say the same thing, even if it were 1960 and the dem wasn't fully supporting AA rights. Either you can put the guy who is more likely to be swayed by you or you can put the guy who hates your guts in there.

You can vote for potential or for no hope whatsoever. Don't vote for no hope whatsoever because mere potential isn't perfect.

[unfrigginreal]

1. Hear Hear

My thread was locked for essentially saying the same thing. Kudos to you

[Solon]

2. As you as we open our mouths to complain, you'll say that we should wait until after he's...

reelected and a lame duck. Rather lame argument you have there. :eyes: And don't say you won't chastise us for that, you know you will, you are that kinds of asshole.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

7. i assume that since you seem to state this as a fact, you know how to predict the future? n/t

[Solon]

11. Based on actions of many in the past, yes...

I'm not necessarily saying YOU, personally, but many many poeple, both on DU and in IRL will still tell gays and their allies to stay quiet. They'll use the Mid-terms and Obama's reelection as an excuse, but basically they just don't want people to criticize their chosen candidate, no matter how legitimate the criticism is.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

23. I would agree with those saying wait until the day after the election but

anybody who were to say 'keep quiet due to the mid terms or reelection' on that day and beyond I'd be more then happy to smack behind the head for acting foolishly and tell them to get to work on actually getting equal rights for all and not try to stall/hold back the process since Obama has more or less said he want people to hold his feet to the fire(I just don't see it as a wise move myself to actually do that until he has the power to make changes)

[Solon]

25. Frankly I think most Obama supporters on DU and elsewhere...

aren't sincere when they say they'll hold his feet to the fire after the election. The reason is simple, just like every other candidate during the primaries, he has acolytes, followers, not supporters. Whether they actually consist of a majority or not, I cannot say for sure, I guess we'll find out after he wins. A true supporter recognizes the faults in their candidate and wants to help the candidate correct them, a follower or acolyte doesn't recognize the faults in the first place.

[WeDidIt]

9. Nah, actually nearlyall of us will stand next to you

as you demand what is your right.

If we do it on November 5, by 2012 it;'ll be a complete non-issue as everybody will be use to it by then.

[Solon]

17. No I don't think so....

First off, I have all my rights, I'm straight, but I stand up for my GLBT brothers and sisters with a passion because I do know what its like to be on the sidelines of society, even if in a different way. I will not, and never will, accept the sidelining of civil rights for convenience sake, that is the way of capitulation.

[WeDidIt]

18. That's surprisingly the argument Nader uses

:eyes:

[Solon]

21. Oooh, the Nader card, what a surprise, NOT!

Did I say anything about NOT voting for Obama?

I swear, this "my way or the highway" bullshit is getting old, guess what, we can still vote for the guy we don't like, because we like the other guy even less.

[Beregond2]

16. Do you understand that all change is incremental?

Do you not know that in a mere forty years, gays have gone from being unmentionables to having our rights discussed by Presidential candidates? That is an eye-blink, historically. Do you understand that our quest is just one element in a much larger movement for justice and freedom, and that means that everyone must sometimes be patient? Do you not see that by pushing for too much too fast, we are feeding a massive tide of hatred? How does that serve our interests?

Personally, I couldn't care less about these things for myself. I long ago gave up any hope of finding a gay man that was capable of a serious long-term commitment. I rather doubt that the word "married" would make the slightest difference. But I nevertheless support equal rights. What I don't support is irresponsible gays who are so monomaniacal they would rather sacrifice everything to this one cause than use their heads.

Obama is a miraculous candidate, who has come along just barely - I hope - in the nick of time. If we are very lucky, and we all work very hard with him, we just might pull human civilization out of the fire. And if that means not being able to stage weddings at the White Party for a few more years, I really don't give a flying fuck. Preventing our ending up in concentratrion camps, or at least Hoovervilles, strikes me as slightly more important.

God, I hate my people sometimes...

[marimour]

19. Thank you for this.

[Beregond2]

3. Exactly.

[WeDidIt]

4. Prepare to be castigated

as was I for saying the same thing on one of the threads.

[Smarmie Doofus]

5. I must be out of the loop. Are people here saying they won't *vote*....

... for Obama because of marriage inequality? ( Lunacy, imo.)

Or are they just pointing out the inconsistency? ( Completely legit, if you ask me.)

At this point , I look on the "sanctity of hetero marriage " business as just another hoop these guys have to jump thru... like kissing babies or wearing lapel pins or talking about ( ugh!) "god". I can't take it seriously.

At this point, I want and expect and Obama and Co. to do what they have to do ( within reason) to get elected.

I also expect them to move on marriage equality when the opportunity presents itself. And I believe that they will.

[dsc]

6. 1960 is a horrible analogy from your side

MLK Sr was a Republican and MLK Jr was on the fence until he got arrested and Kennedy went to bat for him while Nixon sat on the sidelines. Then Kennedy won the closest election in history.

[IndianaJones]

24. its called courage. its in short supply by the so-called left. nt.

[rug]

8. Binary thinking is what's led to people saying it's Obama or fascism.

Life is more complex and people don't have to stifle expressing their lives and intimate concerns because of a GDP post. Or an election.

[jsmirman]

14. But, uh, elections, as they stand right now, are pretty damn binary, no?

not saying anyone has to stifle their opinions - but the above is true, right?

I think complaining while realizing what a pivotal election this is for Gay Rights would seem sensible to me.

[rug]

20. If you consider 338 - 200 to be a binary number.

And calling a lame position for what it is is not complaining. It's either a wrong position or a false position. Either way it is not going to save or lose the election. Obama is the superior candidate with a lousy position on this issue. McCain is a lousy candidate with an inferior position. The election has been over for some time and it's time to make it mean something. Starting with tossing these politically "safe" positions.

[FreeState]

10. I live in CA and there is a bigoted amendment here I will not shut up - and I am voting Obama n/t

[JeffR]

12. I'm a heterosexual and I'm very disappointed with his stance.

I support Obama fully and enthusiastically, but I don't like this; and I don't see how my complaining about it now does a thing to undermine his triumph in November.

[progressivebydesign]

13. this situation at DU is bringing up some bad memories of a DU imposter from years ago.

He cozied up for months and months on DU, pretending to be a gay Democrat -- but suddenly he started posting things that would have made you question a newby poster (not a long time friend here). Then.. the night of the election he went on the attack and hurt a lot of people here.

I'm not saying that any particular person here is a fake -- but I find it rather odd that we suddenly have a flurry of threads here stating why they don't support Obama suddenly... I mean, what the fuck is the alternative?? NADER??? McCain? Perhaps they want Palin to pray their gay away. Cuz a vote for anyone but Obama puts that religious homophobe in office.

Are people really willing to sacrifice the entire Democratic platform, and how it effects the daily lives of everyone, just to make a statement about their particular issue? Hey.. I don't agree with everything that my candidates believe, but it would never make me post these threads and call them out.

Something feels "off", and I believe some very fine and honest DUers are being joined with and egged on by those that are neither.

[Solon]

15. People have the right to their feelings and the right to express them...

do you honestly expect any DUer who is basically having their entire life discounted, on national TV no less, by BOTH parties, to remain quiet? Hell, we had one poster who simply said they were hurt, nothing more, nothing less, and they were ATTACKED for their feelings of rejection by the national party. Who the fuck are you or anyone else to discount the feelings of people like him?

[marimour]

27. Did they curse at people like you? Sounds like whoever it was showed more class than you.

I haven't responded to whoever it was that was hurt because everyone has a right to not like it if the candidate opposes something so important to them. However, unless they were completely clueless before, there was nothing new said that should warrant the FISA like threats to cut off donations and not vote. Some of those FISA people were really repukes or PUMA's trying to stir up controversy and the fact that we all of a sudden have a million threads on this topic reeks of the same.

[Solon]

29. Who the fuck are you to talk about that, newbie?

:eyes:

[marimour]

22. I agree.

Its hard to believe that for people who have donated thousands to a campaign, or people who volunteered, that this is the first time they are hearing this position. People who frequent DU for this long are like the clueless people who only first learned about their positions. Joe Biden didn't say anything more controversial that Obama or Hillary said during the ENTIRE campaign but all of a sudden, they are "concerned". I understand their wanting more but the suddenness of the anger sounds like someone just trying to stir up controversy.

[racaulk]

32. Biden is a very gifted public speaker.

He had the ability to handle that question with a lot more finesse than he did. It wasn't that I was surprised by his position - I have long known what his position was. That's not the point, for me at least. He answered the question with a definitive "no" when didn't have to. He could have wandered into that "I'm kinda for it but I'm kinda not" territory where most of our Democratic leaders tend to reside, but he didn't. He said, loudly and clearly, "NO"...just like Sarah Palin did. That's what hurt me so much.

And to see such a lack of empathy here on DU, on a supposedly progressive message board, only made that hurt even more.

I don't think anyone is trying to "stir up controversy" here. Asking for real leadership on this issue is not wrong, and there's never a bad time to do that.

[Starry Messenger]

26. I'm in California.

Yes on Prop 8 just released a perfectly disgusting ad that is hitting the markets here and is all over the internet.

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=yes+on+prop+8+ad&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

I don't see concern trolling. I see frustrated people who got dumped on this week and just want to vent. Just my .02.

[racaulk]

28. That's the thing, there's never a good time to bring up this issue. Never.

On November 5th, we'll be told to wait until he's inaugurated. After January 20th, we'll be told not to push him too hard, because if he takes too many liberal stances, there could be backlash from the Congress and he won't get anything done. Not only that, but there will be backlash from the voters and we may lose Congress just like we did in 1994. If we do hold onto Congress, we will be told to wait until after his reelection campaign. And we come full circle.

You see, this is always an inconvenient topic of conversation for those that have their full civil rights under US law. You could have written this exact same OP in defense of Kerry back in 2004.

Every four years, the "whatcha gonna do, vote Republican?" argument is getting more and more lame. On this issue, the Democrats get my anti-Republican vote, and I'm tired of my Party welcoming me only because they feel I have nowhere else to go. Don't offer me the stick when other voters are being offered the carrot.

I understand that no candidate will be a paragon of virtue - I bet we can all find something we don't like about all four of the major candidates. But it's never a wrong time to ask our elected officials (or candidates for office) in the Democratic Party to show real leadership on equality. Equality is progressive, after all.

[marimour]

30. there is a perfect time to ask, When they are president and can actually do something about it.

We are on the verge of having a Democratic president and possibly a filibuster proof Congress. We will be able to accomplish so much without having to compromise to please Republicans. But we will never get there if we start up the culture wars weeks before the election, because Republicans will ALWAYS win that fight.

[racaulk]

34. We were told the same thing in 2004.

Will we hear the same thing in 2012 too? :shrug:

[Solon]

35. No, no, you got it all wrong, in 2004, it was the gays' fault Kerry lost!

Get your Democratic party talking points straight, dammit! :sarcasm:

[QC]

37. Don't forget that we made Gore lose in 2000, also.

When I arrived here in 2001, not long after the board opened, there was already a guy whose specialty was declaring that The Gays had caused us to lose and thus afflicted the nation with Bush and Cheney.

Of course, open homophobia was not acceptable on DU then, so he had to pretend that he was declaring our culpability more in sorrow than in anger. Now, of course, there's no need for that pretense: people can just openly and proudly proclaim that "they" should stay in the designated GLBT forum and stop making "all of us" miserable.

How very progressive!

[WeDidIt]

31. On November 5th, it's a done deal

Bush is not even as strong as a lame duck at that point.

The time to strike is November 5th.

And not just on this issue, but on the bail out, gays in the military, faith based initiatives, EVERYTHING!

[racaulk]

33. I truly hope that you are right.

But based on what I've seen in the past here, I'm really afraid that after Obama is inaugurated, that the focus will be on the 2010 midterm elections...and how teh gays must be quiet as to not fuck that up. I really, really hope that I am wrong on that.

I suppose we'll see in time. Until then, let's just work on getting Obama elected. I'll give a Dem President the benefit of the doubt. Again.

Speaking of Bush, even as we speak, Bush is the lamest of the lame ducks. He is hated by America and his has officially become the worst President in our history. And it couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. :)

[Bill McBlueState]

36. We know.

Those of us who support marriage equality have been through this before. We're used to it.