White House Press Sec Gibbs punts at the podium on DOMA question by Advocate reporter

Yep, it's partly the mixed messages coming from the White House

But it's also the fact that Gibbs just isn't that good at this. I've often wondered that out of all of the polished people om Obama's staff, why they chose Robert Gibbs for Press Secretary. It doesn't take much to make him go all Deer in the Headlights in there.

---

by: Margaret @ Mon May 18, 2009 at 17:28:27 PM CDT

I think we should applaud him...

...for being just one or two more press conference away from fully admitting,

"I don't know the answer to that gay rights question because we really don't give a flying f--k about gay rights. We got their votes, we got their donations, and we fully expect to get them again in 2010 and 2012 because they don't have the b-lls to stand up to us.

I would like to thank Kerry Eleveld, though. If she hadn't helped sell Obama's naked lie about having personally 'passed' the Illinois gay rights bill to her readers, well....

Kerry, if you're listening, we're sending you a scale model of the Obama Campaign Bus. Wear it in good health!"

---

by: Michael Bedwell @ Mon May 18, 2009 at 19:47:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

THIS is just too rich!!!

Obama is delivering the commencement address this Friday at the Annapolis...the service academy for the military branch that has traditionally been the most ruthless in discharging gays...the same place Gen. Rectum Powell told graduates in 1993 that he would understand should they resign if out gays were admitted to the Navy??????????

Wonder how many chairs will be empty that would have held the cadets kicked out for being gay since he was sworn in?

Now one COULD imagine that this is the forum he's been waiting on to repeat and re-affirm his 2007 eloquent attack on the ban, and the lack of courage and leadership that led to its becoming law...as well as his explicit promises to send the commanders of each branch and his Secty of Defense into battle to fight it.

I'll gladly celebrate being wrong, but, in the meantime, that sound you hear is me NOT holding my breath.

---

by: Michael Bedwell @ Mon May 18, 2009 at 20:01:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Same Sh*t Different Day

I'm trying to keep up the hope, but it's hard. It's easier just to accept Obama used gay rights to help him get elected - except this time he used them the opposite way. Oh well - that's my fault for believing in a politician while knowing full well that he was a politician.

Close the GayTM. Only give to candidates who have actually done something other than make promises - most are just pandering for our cash.

---

by: JohnVisser @ Mon May 18, 2009 at 18:23:33 PM CDT

Not All Politicians

A few of us will never give up on Equality and compromise that. There will be issues I will change my stance on when circumstances change.  But, there is no reason to change a stance from Equality to not equal.

Pam,
J'aime ma Peau

---

by: Blonde Pam @ Mon May 18, 2009 at 22:08:12 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oh good gravy.

The WH wasn't ready to answer a question on marriage equality? Their feigning of ignorance is extremely transparent as a planned act.

-----
~~Autumn~~

As if there were safety in stupidity alone.
--Henry David Thoreau

---

by: Autumn Sandeen @ Mon May 18, 2009 at 18:41:04 PM CDT

hmmmm

FIERCE ADVOCATE for LGBT issues, my rosey red rectum....

---

by: timNC @ Mon May 18, 2009 at 18:54:26 PM CDT

what happened to the one-word answers?

http://www.boxturtlebulletin.c...
Gibbs has evolved in the past four months.  

---

by: chiefscribe @ Mon May 18, 2009 at 19:44:34 PM CDT

Enough of this dunce Gibbs

These questions need to be asked of and answered by President Obama at the earliest available opportunity.

---

by: kevinchi @ Mon May 18, 2009 at 20:05:27 PM CDT

Three possible explanations:

1) Gibbs is the dumbest person in the White House and Malia could have his job in a red hot minute, because he called on the Advocate not knowing this would be the question;

2) Gibbs is trying to communicate to our demographic, through feigned ignorance and apathy. that in the high level strategy meetings, the decision was made to try to ignore the problem that our demands for equality are increasingly both practical and realistic--to encourage us to think otherwise; or

3) The many campaign promises made to get our support were automatically revoked by Obama winning the election and we're supposed to stop asking for them to be fulfilled--no matter what occurs in the states.

I'm going with 3), even though it makes the new President too much like the old one in this respect.

As Jon Stewart said about W, 'He's reliable. What he believed on Monday, he will still believe on Wed.--no matter WHAT happened on Tuesday.'

Barack is becoming very reliable.

But wait, there's more!

---

by: PhoenixRising @ Mon May 18, 2009 at 22:49:24 PM CDT

Does anyone know the answer to this?

Let's say that all states eventually allow civil marriage for GLBT, thus positively fulfilling "leaving it up to the states to decide" and having them actually decide in favor of marriage rights.  By saying it's up to the states to decide but not adding that Obama would change DOMA at the federal level, who the flip cares about getting marriage rights at the state level?  I don't get it!  What am I missing?  The benefits at the federal level are WAAAAAAAY more important than any state-level benefits.  From this line of thinking, why are we spending ANY time at the state level fighting for equality when, at the end of the day, it doesn't give us much if we succeed?  I just think there's a huge missing piece of what Obama says if he doesn't finish off "the states should decide" with "and then we'll honor their decisions at the federal level."  Who cares about state-level marriage rights?  The overwhelming benefits are accrued at the federal level.  Right?

---

by: Narra @ Tue May 19, 2009 at 08:01:09 AM CDT

I giva a flip about getting state marriage rights.

It is in "the state" that I have to go to the hospital, or live, or work.  If we don't have the states rights first, the federal wouldn't matter.  I highly doubt that the lesbian couple that was denied visitation when one was dying would consider "States Rights" less important than Federal Rights at that point.  Each state has different rights extended to marriage, so BOTH are equally important.  You cannot get to Federal Rights in this case without having obtained rights in multiple States.  Federal Law does NOT always trump state law.  Just look at the recent Supreme Court decision not to hear a medical marijuana case, which in essence upheld state drug laws over federal drug laws.  This entire fight has won every right by going first after municipalities by getting city domestic partnership rights and then moving up to county then state rights.  State rights are just as important as the federal rights.

The trollish sounding blogger formerly known as BURNSEY

---

by: R.K. Wright @ Tue May 19, 2009 at 08:35:19 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thanks!

I see what you are saying, but with healthcare and financial powers of attorney (which I admit are costly to set up compared to the cost of getting married), as long as you don't have an unfriendly judge interpreting, you don't need marriage to have hospital rights.  Right?  Are there any other reasons?  I think that being able to file federal tax returns as married (thus lowering the required income needed to run a more stable, financially healthy household - because state taxes are always much less than federal tax rates) and having access to social security survivorship benefits and disability benefits, etc. are some of the most important benefits that you cannot get through a good family attorney setting up POAs and wills.  And those only come at the federal level.  Believe me, I am completely open-minded to hear why it is important to focus so heavily at the state level and I guess I can see that you have to start local in order to change enough minds to be able to change things at the federal level.  But my original point is that Obama goes around saying, "leave it up to the states to decide" and what I'm saying is that the federal marriage benefits definitely trump anything at the state level.  The only other thing I can think of would be corporate pension benefits or something like that.....probably falls under the state.  But if you have ENDA in place and DOMA gone, I think you could argue that such state-level corporate benefits laws have to reflect the federal civil rights laws.    

---

by: Narra @ Tue May 19, 2009 at 08:52:33 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Depends on the hospital

My Beloved and I have Advanced Directives, and Health Care POAs. Legally, she's the one person allowed at my side in the hospital room. Unfortunately, Reciprocal Beneficiaries in Hawaii don't establish legal kinship, and we're not married, so when I got into my car accident and was in the ER back in February, the ER nurse wouldn't let her in. She wasn't "real" family, and Beloved didn't have the time or the money to get an attorney down to that hospital to get the POA enforced. Now, if we'd been wearing wedding rings in a state which recognized marriage, $10 says that wouldn't have happened.

The only piece of paper that makes an unrelated pair of conjugal adults a legal family is a marriage license. And THAT is issued by the state, and then recognized by the federal government. So, we have to play both sides.

I'm about to be a federal employee. Even if we could get married, my employer wouldn't recognize my family. And THAT pisses me off.

God save ornery old queens! - kevinchi

---

by: Keori @ Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:15:59 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Great NY Times article

...on how hospitals treat same-sex couples.  The comments are a good read as well.  

Somewhere buried in the comments is a statement that a hospital doesn't even have to honor a health care directive or POA, but I can't imagine that to be true.  And how many of us actually carry the paperwork around?  

http://tinyurl.com/pksv4s

---

by: fq5757 @ Tue May 19, 2009 at 10:56:32 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Dead link

How Hospitals Treat Same-Sex Couples

---

by: Chris From Old Europe @ Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:34:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

No. You got it backwards.

Marriage law is state law.

All the feds can do--or refuse to do as required by DOMA--is honor or reject marriage certificates.

But the vast majority of interactions with government are at state and local levels.

You're right that a lot of the money will be saved for our families when we get equal treatment from the federal level. But we can't ASK for that until we have valid marriage certificates, which are issued by states.

But wait, there's more!

---

by: PhoenixRising @ Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:46:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ok thanks everyone.

I understand it much better.  Thanks.

---

by: Narra @ Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:01:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

There's a belief

That in order to get the "moderates" on the Supreme Court to find in our favor, they'll have to see a trend among the states.  

# Duty, duty -- honor is, is --
Honor, Creideiki -- alertly
# Shared, is -- Honor #

---

by: MileHighDawg @ Tue May 19, 2009 at 08:31:49 AM CDT

Ok thanks.

I just wanted to figure out if I was missing something in all this.  I just think it's disingenuous (sp?) of Obama to state something that is intellectually dishonest......since I consider him to be very intellectually honest on other issues.  

---

by: Narra @ Tue May 19, 2009 at 08:54:20 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

You have to wonder...

Why he picked the Advocate anyway...especially given the pounding the admin has taken on LGBT issues? Please remember that the Press Secretary knows in advance who they will and will not answer questions from. Just as Ari Fleisher was adept at ignoring smaller outlets "hostile" to Bush.

Also, what exactly is the rush here? People have waited years for this, why had 5 months suddenly become unacceptable?

---

by: SciFi Geek @ Tue May 19, 2009 at 11:42:51 AM CDT

Logical conclusions

I don't think you can look in the head of other people trough the use of logic. That's speculation, nothing more.

---

by: Chris From Old Europe @ Tue May 19, 2009 at 12:28:27 PM CDT