News Tips?
-- tips@phblend.com

PHB Mobile

Access 11/5 Senate ENDA Hearing Live Blog

Access Tuesday's Election Live Blog


33|175:175

About
-- The Blog
-- Pam | My home page
-- Autumn
-- Daimeon
-- Julien
-- "Radical" Russ
-- Terrance

Contact the Baristas

The Blend Blogrolls

Activism


Best of the Blend
Blog Posts

Special Events and Interviews

Blend-o-licious endorsements...



The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend:
"a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."

He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior." (CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)


Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).

"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008



Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:

A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist."
(Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)

"A nutty lesbian blogger."
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)


Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush


who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
--"Joe"

Content © 2004-2008
Pam Spaulding

House Blend logo © 2005
Melissa McEwan

Photo of Pam Spaulding
© Judy G. Rolfe
All Rights Reserved.


SITE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Support the Blend




An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.


Berry to Advocate: hate crimes 'may pass' next week; gives WH response to DOMA

by: Pam Spaulding

Sun Jun 14, 2009 at 21:25:44 PM EDT


The house is on fire and out comes the thimble of H20 to try to put it out. You were waiting for the official White House response to the flaming pile of crap that is the DOMA brief, well here it is. The Advocate's Kerry Eleveld spoke with the director of the Office of Personnel Management, John Berry, who is the highest ranking LGBT official in the Obama administration. He told Kerry that he cleared his comments with the WH; these include:

* There was no backroom deal with the LGBT advocacy orgs. "We are working in partnership with all LGBT groups, and all groups are doing what they should be doing, which is passionately representing their unique interests."

* They are going to try to eliminate discrimination for federal workers (to add transfolk, since gay workers are covered). Exactly how is this going to happen?

* There will be a "significant announcement" soon regarding equal benefits provided to other federal employees for LGBTs.

[W]e want to make sure that we get the benefits for the LGBT community that are equal to all other benefits provided to other federal employees, and where we have the authority to move forward, the president is going to be announcing something in the very near future that is going to be a very significant announcement in that regard. Where it requires legislation, we will seek and support it.
Well, since there's a snowball's chance in hell anything will pass due to "leadership" by Pelosi and Reid, it's rose-colored-glasses material.

* OK, here's "the plan" from Berry:

We have four broad legislative goals that we want to accomplish and legislation is one of these things where you've got to move when the opportunity strikes, so I'm going to list them in an order but it's not necessarily going to go one, two, three, four. Obviously, I think the first opportunity is hate crimes and we're hopeful that we can get that passed this week. We're going to try, but if not, we're going to keep at it until we get it passed. The second one ENDA, we want to secure that passage of ENDA, and third is we want to repeal legislatively "don't ask don't tell," and fourth, we want to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.

Now, I'm not going to pledge -- and nor is the president -- that this is going to be done by some certain date.

Doesn't it seem interesting that suddenly hate crimes is being pushed up the food chain pronto? I wonder why. I'm still agog that they think ENDA is an easier sell that DADT. Can anyone tell me why they think that Congress is ready to battle, for instance, Lou Sheldon and his bathroom hysteria propaganda as opposed to the discredited Elaine Donnelly? And as far as a date is concerned, no one asked for a date to pass anything, but a plan, and how the WH plans to work with Pelosi and Reid to find some votes, because they certainly haven't acted like anyone should be lobbying their Congresspeeps.

Now here you go folks -- Berry's word from the WH re: DOMA. We report, you decide.

Finally, I want to talk to you about the DOMA brief. Our strongest argument against "don't ask, don't tell" is that we stand with the truth. And that we, more than anyone, know the cost of lying and the terrible pain it invokes.

This president took a solemn oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and he does not get to decide and choose which laws he enforces. He has to enforce the laws that have been enacted appropriately and that he has inherited. It would be wrong for me or any of our community to advise him to lie or to shirk his responsibility. He's doing his job. He has made clear that he stands for the repeal of DOMA. It will be part of this administration's agenda to accomplish that act. We ought not waste energy and angst attacking him when we should be focusing the energy and effort on getting 218 votes in the house and 60 votes in the Senate, and that's where we ought to target the energy and the strength of this community and this president is with us, this is our agenda and it's his agenda.

This is sad, people. The administration trots out John Berry, who clearly means well, to deliver the same lie about "having to uphold DOMA" that Richard Socarides debunked earlier today -- the administration had a choice. This is a mess, a bit fat FAIL in response to some serious heat being generated over this. Honestly, White House folks, didn't you all learn that the cover up is as bad or worse than the crime?

Go read the rest of Kerry's interview and come back and comment.

I will say one thing -- obviously the White House knows it has to do damage control, something it has seemed to think it was above when it came to thumbing its nose at the LGBT community. You are being listened to. Probably still dismissed, but they know they have to do something. So far, just not the right thing.

1.Full civil rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals must be enacted now.  Delay and excuses are no longer acceptable.

2.We will not leave any part of our community behind.

3.Separate is never equal.

4.Religious beliefs are not a basis upon which to affirm or deny civil rights.

5.The establishment and guardianship of full civil rights is a non-partisan issue.

6.Individual involvement and grassroots action are paramount to success and must be encouraged.

7.Success is measured by the civil rights we all achieve, not by words, access or money raised.

8.Those who seek our support are expected to commit to these principles.

Related:
* Top gay in the administration says ENDA, DADT, and DOMA have no chance at this point (and then he lies, to boot)
Pam Spaulding :: Berry to Advocate: hate crimes 'may pass' next week; gives WH response to DOMA
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Talk is cheap...
Talk is cheap...with Obama it's not the "gold standard" but the "bullshit standard."

I'd like to hear Frank Kameny, whom Berry graciously invited to and acknowledged at his swearing in, respond to him.

Frank is 83 now I believe but it would be Berry AND Barry pickin' time!


"angst"
i love when someone tells me i should or should not feel "angst".

AT LEAST....
...he didn't say we "shouldn't take this personally."

[ Parent ]
At Least he didn't say "No offense"
But what makes you think he "clearly means well" Pam?

HE'S A PAID SHILL!!!!


[ Parent ]
Where are the reactions from the Equality Caucus?
I asked this in the comments of another thread...

Has anyone in the Equality Caucus released a statement? If they have, post the link. Here is the list:

List of Caucus Members in the 111th Congress
http://lgbt.tammybaldwin.house...

The caucus currently has 79 members:

Co-Chairs

Tammy Baldwin (D-WI02)
Jared Polis (D-CO)
Barney Frank (D-MA)

Vice Chairs

Rob Andrews (D-NJ)
Xavier Becerra (D-CA)
Lois Capps (D-CA)
Yvette Clarke (D-NY)
Joseph Crowley (D-NY)
Diana DeGette (D-CO)
Keith Ellison (D-MN)
Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ)
Mike Honda (D-CA)
Barbara Lee (D-CA)

Caucus Members

Neil Abercrombie (D-HI)
Shelley Berkley (D-NV)
Howard Berman (D-CA)
Tim Bishop (D-NY)
Earl Blumenauer (D-OR)
Robert Brady (D-PA)
Michael Capuano (D-MA)
André Carson (D-IN)
Kathy Castor (D-FL)
Susan Davis (D-CA)
Peter DeFazio (D-OR)
Bill Delahunt (D-MA)
Rosa DeLauro (D-CT)
Eliot Engel (D-NY)
Anna Eshoo (D-CA)
Bob Filner (D-CA)
Charles Gonzalez (D-TX)
Luis Gutierrez (D-IL)
Phil Hare (D-IL)
Jane Harman (D-CA)
Alcee Hastings (D-FL)
Mazie Hirono (D-HI)
Rush Holt (D-NJ)
Mazie Hirono (D-HI)
Steve Israel (D-NY)
Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX)
Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX)
Patrick Kennedy (D-RI)
Mary Jo Kilroy (D-OH)
Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)
John Lewis (D-GA)
Zoe Lofgren (D-CA)
Nita Lowey (D-NY)
Carolyn Maloney (D-NY)
James McGovern (D-MA)
Jerry Nadler (D-NY)
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL)
Linda Sánchez (D-CA)
Jan Schakowsky (D-IL)
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL)
Henry Waxman (D-CA)
Anthony Weiner (D-NY)
Peter Welch (D-VT)
Doris Matsui (D-CA)
Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY)
Jim McDermott (D-WA)
James Moran (D-VA)
Patrick Murphy (D-PA)
Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC)
Frank Pallone (D-NJ)
Bill Pascrell (D-NJ)
Chellie Pingree (D-ME)
Mike Quigley (D-IL)
Steven Rothman (D-NJ)
José Serrano (D-NY)
Joe Sestak (D-PA)
Brad Sherman (D-CA)
Jackie Speier (D-CA)
Pete Stark (D-CA)
Betty Sutton (D-OH)
Ellen Tauscher (D-CA)
Edolphus Towns (D-NY)
Niki Tsongas (D-MA)
Nydia Velázquez (D-NY)
Robert Wexler (D-FL)
Lynn Woolsey (D-CA)
David Wu (D-OR)


An alternative point of view
While I do not agree with the adminsitration concerning the DOMA brief in the Smelt case, I do believe that Obama will deliver on Hate Crimes, DADT and ENDA and DOMA.  We manage to "bitch" about any and everyting the Obama administration commits to us.  Just as a reminder, the admistration has done the following in its first 21 weeks:

Signed on to the UN resolution decriminilizing being gay in 55 countries

Anew Act Against AIDS prevention campaign

The most LGBT affirming Pride Month proclamation ever.  Words count, just ask the transgender community if they were happy to be included for the first time.

Nominated a Secretary of the Army who says he supports repeal of DADT

Vigourous support of Hate Crimes legislation.

All of this means nothing because Obama is not implementing the agneda the way you want it.  I for one will celebrate passage of Hate Crimes, I will celebrate extension of rights to transgender federal employees and I celebrate a President who has a public agenda concerning our issues.


[ Parent ]
Not quite
All of this means nothing because Obama is not implementing the agneda the way you want it.

A more accurate way to sum up my feelings would be:

All of this means nothing because Obama is not implementing anything substantial.

Signed on to the UN resolution decriminilizing being gay in 55 countries

A toothless resolution that means nothing. Stop that, or we'll think really bad things about you.

Anew Act Against AIDS prevention campaign

This is LGBT related how? Or is this truly some kind of time warp back to the 80s, when the segment of population with the most rapid increase in HIV infections wasn't straight minority women?

The most LGBT affirming Pride Month proclamation ever.

Like Oh, my Gawd. The best one EVER? Really? Totally bitchin.

Words. Words don't pay my bills. Words don't reduce my tax penalty. Words don't make my husband magically have access to my insurance. Actions do, but The Big O seems sadly lacking in the action department.

Nominated a Secretary of the Army who says he supports repeal of DADT

Once, you know, they actually get around to doing something like repealing DADT. Oh, wait, they've said they're not going to, they're waiting for Congress. And Congress says they're waiting for the White House. Who do you think will blink first? Or maybe neither, and we'll be left dangling. Yeah, probably that.

Vigourous support of Hate Crimes legislation.

Vigrous support? Vigorous? Can you point me to one or two examples of this vigorous support? Cause I'm not seeing it.

Cause any fool knows, a dog needs a home; a shelter from pigs on the wing


[ Parent ]
To bring up even more subtlety
Rights and benefits are way important than words and gestures. The latter do matter, though. Positive words and gestures, like those listed, must be weighed against negative words and gestures, like silence on the filing’s over-the-top content, the McClurkin fiasco, the invocation snub, etc. I do not think it hyperbolic in the least to claim that this administration has sent mixed messages to queer folk.

[ Parent ]
Fine, go and celebrate. Someplace else.


The American people, taking one with another, are the most timorous, sniveling, poltroonish, ignominious mob of serfs and goose-steppers ever gathered under one flag in Christendom since the end of the Middle Ages.
-H.L. Mencken


[ Parent ]
Enforce?
Berry says that Obama is required to enforce the law.  Well, why are we even talking about enforcing the law?  The complaint on the table now is defending it.

We need to realize that once the Obama administration and its defenders start talking about enforcing the law, they're changing the subject.


Torture is against the law.
So enforce the law!  OH, that's right, they can pick and choose which laws they want to enforce and those they don't.  WAIT A MINUTE,
This president took a solemn oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and he does not get to decide and choose which laws he enforces. He has to enforce the laws that have been enacted appropriately and that he has inherited.

The tangled web we weave when we try to deceive.  

President Obama, FUCK YOU!

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.


[ Parent ]
take care to enforce the law, &c.
Indeed. If he wants to enforce DOMA and, at the same time, 18 USC §§ 2241, 2340, 2340A and all the other stuff about torture and war crimes, fine. If he wants to make lame pleadings about DOMA, and put Dick Cheney, John Yoo, and Donald Rumsfeld on capital charges of crimes against humanity at the same time, I'll call it even.

Till that happens, I'm not buying the "enforce the law" excuse.


[ Parent ]
Exactly, President Obama has dug himself a big hole
  And the best way to get out of a hole is to quit digging first.  He made the big statement from the get go that waterboarding is torture.  Even the HMFIC of the justice department, Eric Holder even said as much.  Now someone please tell me why again there are no investigations and/or prosecutions taking place?

 Mr Obama, that track hoe your have digging overtime is no where near running out of fuel.  Also, to make it stop digging you need to remove your hands from the bucket controls.

Now, quit digging.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.


[ Parent ]
Forget torture (ok, we can't) but here is a better example:
Justice Department Refuses to Defend Congress in Legal Battle Over Law Censoring Marijuana Policy Ads

Solicitor General Says Government 'Does Not Have a Viable Argument to Advance in the Statute's Defense'

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Department of Justice has notified Congress that it will not defend a law prohibiting the display of marijuana policy reform ads in public transit systems. . .
(1/26/2005)
http://www.aclu.org/drugpolicy...


[ Parent ]
I'm sorry but....
This crap from the Obama camp is simply bullshit.  I am going to keep the pressure on until we have the rights we deserve.  I am tried of hearing that he is focused on bigger issues.

A good friend pointed out tonight that the DOJ had enough resources and time to put out that piece of bigoted crap defense of DOMA, so why can't they spend some time ensuring what they promised.....the repeal of all of this discriminatory nonsense.

I am tired of talk.

I want action.


your friend should also realize
that the author of that DOJ brief has been around since Bush, and this is likely a recycled effort, not a brand-new, completely original brief -- which would take very little time or resources.

[ Parent ]
Hold that thought!
http://www.domawatch.org/cases...

http://www.domawatch.org/cases...

Here's 2 of those previous efforts

There's a third one in the comments section at Box Turtle B.

http://www.boxturtlebulletin.c...


[ Parent ]
FINE!
Then where is the repudiation of the hate speech that was in that brief?  The fundie nutjobs will be running that bullshit for YEARS to come unless he repudiates it!  Every time DOMA comes up, it will be, "President Obama, like us, believes that protecting marriage with DOMA is like protecting marriage from incest."  If I don't hear repudiation of that language, then I don't buy it.

[ Parent ]
I agree.
The man is not an executive.  He needs to take responsibility for his administration's actions.

[ Parent ]
He was a zoo director
Not exactly the same field as LGBT civil rights, or even animal rights to live free.

Same-Sex Marriage is good for the economy.

[ Parent ]
And before that he was in charge of personnel issues for the Department of the Interior
Where he was very highly regarded by the department's gay & lesbian employees for policy changes he initiated.  This was all back during the Clinton administration.  He became director of the National Zoo sometime during Shrub's administration.

[ Parent ]
interesting
This is a pretty significant quote right here(bold is mine):
"Now, I'm not going to pledge -- and nor is the president -- that this is going to be done by some certain date. The pledge and the promise is that, this will be done before the sun sets on this administration - our goal is to have this entire agenda accomplished and enacted into law so that it is secure."

that doesn't dismiss or dispel anything I've seen so far, but, it is a far stronger position than I've seen articulated in awhile.

Now it's odd that he seems to contradict himself in the same interview, consider these two quotes:

"Obviously, I think the first opportunity is hate crimes and we're hopeful that we can get that passed this week. We're going to try, but if not, we're going to keep at it until we get it passed. The second one ENDA, we want to secure that passage of ENDA, and third is we want to repeal legislatively "don't ask don't tell," and fourth, we want to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act."

but then he later says:

"Berry: We don't have the votes to do Hate Crimes right now, we don't have the votes to do ENDA, how are we going [to get "don't ask, don't tell]? "

Seems like a contradiction, or that he has no faith in moving forward on Hate Crimes.  Seems bizarre to be "hopeful" on page 2, but when we get to page 3, he's flat out saying "we don't have the votes".

Odd

This isn't terribly reassuring, Pam, but I think you put it best:

"I will say one thing -- obviously the White House knows it has to do damage control, something it has seemed to think it was above when it came to thumbing its nose at the LGBT community. You are being listened to."

Which to me, says, that we can't wait until October to make a large stand (ie, the dubious MOW).  I think state and federal action needs to happen now, while we still have a hot iron and a president who apparently feels like he DOES need to respond to our complaints.  


ummm...how come we did have the votes a few months ago
then the bill was passed twice and then split out of the appropriations bill and sent to committee to die?

And that bill was passed with fewer dems in congress...

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid


[ Parent ]
Sounds like a house faggot to me
and this:

Berry: We don't have the votes to do Hate Crimes right now, we don't have the votes to do ENDA, how are we going [to get "don't ask, don't tell]?

Then, yes, we do need to get on the Senate's case but at the same time, can this Administration of fierce advocacy put a foot in Harry Reid's ass?



Of course he's a House Faggot
The Beltway is full of them.

Didn't you see Outrage ?


[ Parent ]
Bullsh*t of the highest order
The stripped-down ENDA and hate crimes both passed in a far more Republican Congress under Bush, the idea that there are now fewer votes for either is bullsh*t, pure and simple. DADT repeal has higher support than Obama himself, so there is almost no political risk in repealing that either - certainly the administration has enough cover from former military officials, including Colin Powell, who have at least said the policy needs review, if not supporting outright repeal. There is more than enough support in Congress for all three - what we need is leadership, and that comes from the White House.

I knew Obama was a pragmatist when I began supporting him, but I never thought I'd see the political cowardice we are now witnessing. He clearly wants Congress to take the lead on all of these issues, so he doesn't lose any political capital, but the administration sets the legislative agenda, and without their urging, these issues are going to sit on the back burner.

I have completely changed my mind about an October march. I still worry the logistics are too difficult to effectively manage in such a short time, but I also think we need something big - something dramatic, to smack the administration in the face and prove we won't be the Democrats' lapdogs.  


[ Parent ]
Waitaminute
This isn't the first report of that either. Now you're assuming we have more friends in the Senate simply because we have more Democratic Senators. Don't assume that, I never did.

I agree with you that the Administration is using Congress as a scapegoat which is nothing new under the sun, really. Clinton did it with Democratic and Republican Congresses.

But still with this and the situation in New York (not to be forgotten) GLBT lives are routinely thrown on the poker chip table for discussion. And the Administration has even been putting in it's 2 cents into the New York situation. If the Administration can poke its' grubby little hands in the business of the New York State Senate in such a fashion, then can't they put a foot in Harry Reid's ass?

Now THAT is bullshit.


[ Parent ]
The DOMA brief is a homophobic pile
This Administration plays with fire; it may be burnt.

We are not the Uncle Tom's Cabin Republicans and we will not go on being used and abused indefinitely.

Dallas Principles spell it out quickly, dispassionately, and non-negotiably!


oh, it's worse than that
It provides language, and ready citations, for some future appellate judge or Supreme Court justice to write a binding decision that would throw us back to 1986 at least.

[ Parent ]
A miss is as good as a mile
Let's make life a living hell for Obama and Berry and then we can instruct them on how they're supposed to feel about that.

What a day, what a day for an auto-da-fe

Monday's news cycle starts in a few hours
and this is being done in hopes of quashing the DOMA language controversy.

Blatant, clumsy, and desparate, hence scrounging up staff on a weekend to get something out on the wires...

I am very familiar with this kind of nonsense having worked with a certain Chancellor of the Exchequer who is now PM in the UK...

They do not want the LGBT outrage over DOMA's language dominating this weeks's news...

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid


This is what I can no longer stomach
at the bottom of page 2:

We ought not waste energy and angst attacking him when we should be focusing the energy and effort on getting 218 votes in the house and 60 votes in the Senate, and that's where we ought to target the energy and the strength of this community and this president is with us, this is our agenda and it's his agenda.

WE need to gather the votes necessary to enable his administration - lead by our "fierce advocate" - to get bills passed.

In other words, we need to elect more Democrats to give more of a majority to help him get his agenda (whatever that agenda might be - and I don't believe any of his claims anymore).  We need to do our work to get him what he wants and then he can get around to being our "fierce advocate."

Until we help accomplish a comfy filibuster proof majority we should expect his administration to enforce laws and to defame us...and it is OUR own fault if we can't produce a gov't to his liking...a gov't run by politicians that have used us repeatedly and without shame.  

No way.  I'm not devoting one ounce of energy to help you until you can prove to me that I am not being taken advantage of one more time.

Must we resurrect the famous quote bungled by the predecessor:  "fool me once, shame on you...fool me twice, shame on me."

It's your turn to show, O, not mine.


But just think!
Maybe if we do what they suggest, we can get another "pride proclamation" next year too!

The democrats may be the better of two evils, but they're certainly not going to see another dime of my money until we get something in return. I'm sick of us the gays always being the constituency that gets screwed over to show how "centrist" the Democrats are. At least the GOP has the decency to be honest that they don't care about us.


[ Parent ]
read that proclamation closely
It contained a "call to action" near the end of it.  And, that call to action specifically excluded the White House from any action.

[ Parent ]
Whoopee, so the gay community got a whole month
in that proclamation.

Just wait, one of these days I'll have to sit up at one of my family get togethers and hear someone say, "President Obama gave gay people two more days than black people." (/snark/)

I just had to get that out of my system, carry on. :)


[ Parent ]
And Pam, you are likely mistaken
We are not being listened to
They are attempting to sedate us with the opiate of "hope" again...in order not to have to hear us and to avoid having others hear us.

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

Obviously
and then the Administration is trying to shift the blame to Congress.

And while I think Harry and Nancy need to get a backbone, I seem to recall that it was a certain Hyde Parker that said he would be a fierce advocate.

That means using the bully pulpit to get the legislation that you want to sign moving and passed. Doing anything less means that Obama is a fraud and a liar.


[ Parent ]
The Admin is trying to keep DOMA from being news
by distracting us....

They are hoping that we will drop all of our outrage hold our breath in expectation of a Hate Crimes Bill and then take anger out upon Congress..

First of all, as someone said, "fool me once"

Secondly, the President is the leader of the Democratic party. He could, just maybe, lean on some people or perhaps even make a speech, possibly even in the United States, in support of what is supposed to be his own legislative agenda.

Thirdly, the timing of this is such a blatant gesture of contempt, that we will roll over and take anything, that we will be good little queers and sit like expectant lap dogs awaiting a treat.

Stonewall 40, Mr President...we are feeling angry and more than a bit rebellious over here.

We cannot be bought off with a safely hedged "sort of" promise of "maybe"

Our anger and outrage cannot be silenced with a gesture.

Stonewall 40.
You will be rembered as the President that inspired the LGBT community to radicalism again...with your failed attempts at insipid mollification after the most heinous slap in the face that we ever collectively took at the hands of a "fierce advocate"

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid


[ Parent ]
Can we get a double order of SPINE
  Sent to both houses of congress?  I don't think so or it would have been sent back in 2007.  And there would have been thousands of orders sent as well.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

[ Parent ]
I still can't cope with
how patronizing a gesture it was to send Berry out to comment on this.

What a day, what a day for an auto-da-fe

They defended it. They own it
When the Obama administration wrapped their arms around the DOMA brief and defended it, it stopped being the DOMA brief.

It's now the Obama  Brief.

What a day, what a day for an auto-da-fe


Thanks for keeping the pressure on
"... but they know they have to do something. So far, just not the right thing."

Love that comment, Pam! Keep on reporting on this, and keep the pressure on! It's one thing to be used for political capital by an administration that overtly despised us and vilified us. Nobody EXPECTED any different from the Bush administration. It's another to be betrayed by an administration that - I at least - considered to be sensitive on our issues and that you consider to be your "friend". What a disappointment so far. After 8 years together with my partner I'm still on a temporary visa because my partner can't sponsor me, still in danger of being separated from him once my visa runs out...

PS: hope the MSM starts reporting on this!! It's about time. Rachel twittered on it - hope she'll report on it, as well!!!  


We didn't sign DOMA - THEY did
Fix it.

We didn't make the fucking mess, why should we be in charge (besides giving money, organizing support and voting) of creating the change we elected YOU to enforce...the change you were going to be the "fierce advocate" of....

Clinton sacrificed us to save his ass.  He signed the bill.  The Democratic Party campaigned for years adding gasoline to the fire burning at the stake we were tied to...while we voted and organized and gave money.  

Kerry and Edwards ran in 2004 while 13 states amended against us with their blessing.

Dianne Feinstein following Kerry's defeat:  "...too much too fast and too soon for gay marriage"  

It was our fault they lost.  We are the victims of legislation they signed.  

Now we need to do more to get the legislation repealed?

Fuuuuuuuuuuuck youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu!!!!!!


The thing is
we ("the gay community") didn't put same sex marriage bans on any ballot, the fundies did. And I hear this all the time, you didn't win one ballot initiative.

Hell, those 2004 ballot initiatives would not even have legalized same sex marriage, it just wouldn't have banned it. But we get blamed for that too.  


[ Parent ]
you've got to look on the bright side of life
In fairness, Dianne did film a commercial opposing Prop. 8 in the final days before the election. Something, at least. More than other Democratic pollyticians did.

Where do we go from here?
This isn't where we expected to be
--Evita


[ Parent ]
They're obviously trying to divert our attention
from yesterday's massive pile of shit to the hate crimes legislation. And the funny part is he admits the votes aren't there to pass the bill while predicting they can get it passed this week -- do they think we're that stupid?  

Yeah, but Pam told us that a week ago
or something like that. About there not being enough votes for the hate crimes bill, that is

Using Congress as a scapegoat is not cool at all, though it is rather Presidential.

But then, so is the bully pulpit.


[ Parent ]
They want to control the new cycle
and all that we have to do to stop them from taking control back is to publically protest, write, gripe, and to keep doing so....

They are great at controlling the message; this once we can deny them that.

Signs, posters, anything that will get some media attention will keep the news cycle and the message in our control, not theirs.

We play the game on their home field, the media, but we play offense.

And we can win this round, keeping them from being able to whitewash themselves...

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid


[ Parent ]
"news cycle"
sorry, jet lag still and no bloody sleep

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

[ Parent ]
wtf does this mean?
cost of lying and the terrible pain it invokes.  

http://EQFL.org

Therre's not a word in this statement that comes anywhere near addressing the real issue
Even if Obama was duty bound to defend DOMA (which we know is not the case), how does that explain the spectacularly bigoted arguments in the brief?  As any number of legal commentators have noted, it was hardly necessary to compare gay marriage to child rape in order to defend the law.  Why doesn't Berry have anything to say about that?

He is being a good, well-behaved little boy and polishing all right right apples for his boss.  It's very dutiful of him to tell us not to attack Obama.  But why hasn't he been telling Obama not to attack us?  Apparently he's just a messenger boy with no input on policy.


The American people, taking one with another, are the most timorous, sniveling, poltroonish, ignominious mob of serfs and goose-steppers ever gathered under one flag in Christendom since the end of the Middle Ages.
-H.L. Mencken


Jeez, Mr. President! That's some powerful communications ya got going on there!
What?  Did Mr. Berry get an executive circle promotion we don't know about?  Now he's suddenly "empowered" to speak broadly and also in detail about important domestic policy issues and political strategy, and from a position of authority?

Ok, so I've given up hope on expecting something substantive from Mr. Obama himself on DOMA, DADT, etc, etc..  But still no solid statements from the White House Press Office?  No word from anyone in the president's cabinet, like Atty. Gen. Holder? Hey, not even words of tea and sympathy from the First Lady?  I would have expected a better presentation than this, what with all those young, highly educated, and highly paid policy wonks running around the White House.

To have such significant issues finally squeaked out by an administrative bureaucrat actually speaks volumes.  Apparently our concerns do not deserve to be addressed with any kind of respect, candor, or seriousness from a actual inside desicisonmaker or advisor.  With all due respect to Mr. Berry's status as the highest ranking out-of-the-closet government employee, this just stinks.  It's plain insulting to us.


They want us to shut up
so that we do not take them off of message for this weeks news cycle.

That particular battle we can in fact win by keeping on point about the DOMA brief.

and another poster is right;; when was the last time that anyone recalls a lower lever staffer being given a green light to discuss legislative agendas in detail?

This is such an overt attempt to distract from the DOMA fiasco....

and all that we have to do to hold the field is to keep talking, writing, and publically objecting to the vile language in the brief.

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid


[ Parent ]
It doesn't change the gist of your comment, but I'm going to quibble with this sentence a little:
Apparently our concerns do not deserve to be addressed with any kind of respect, candor, or seriousness from a actual inside desicisonmaker or advisor.  

He's the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, and as such he is a decision maker and an advisor on the personnel matters of the executive branch of the government (which is to say, the vast majority of the federal government's employees).  The OPM is an independent agency of the executive branch, akin to the Environmental Protection Agency and also the Central Intelligence Agency.  

One of Obama's campaign pledges was to get Uncle Sam's gay employees the same health benefits (& some other benefits) for their partners that are already available to the spouses of straight employees.  If this happens you will hear from John Berry again, and probably during the Congressional debates that will have to take place to get the laws enacted authorizing this policy change.  

(Quibble completed.)


[ Parent ]
Berry?
Marshal Pétain, I presume?

Petain was the shambling wreck of a once great soldier
Berry is closer to Vikdun Quisling.

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

[ Parent ]
you're right
He's more like Pierre Laval.

[ Parent ]
I have struggled
I have struggled all week-end wondering just why this has made me feel as bad as it has.

I live in NC after all.  There is little chance that I will see any "rights" bestowed upon me in order to need DOMA repealed.  I'm also not in a relationship and don't see one on the horizon.  So, I'm in no need of marriage equality for now.  I'm retired so have no desperate need for ENDA.  Am too old to enlist in the military so DADT doean't affect me.  I don't anticipate any crimes of hate coming my way.  And, I own my home so I don't have to worry about being denied the right to rent housing.

So, with all that said, why do I feel like shit this week-end?

I've come to the conclusion that even though none of this legislation would directly affect me (right now) it still makes me feel horrible to have the administration turn their back on me so blatantly.  To move so rapidly from my fierce advocate to my fierce opponent.  

It feels like being kicked in the gut to have them write that brief where they seem to take delight in dismissing my value as a citizen of this country.  To be told my rights would be an economic drain on the taxpayers while I pay my taxes to support the same rights for others.  To be told outright that I am considered "less than".

Worst of all, to be told these things at the same time that they say it shouldn't bother me.  I should be tolerant and understanding of their plight while I remain a second, or maybe even third class citizen.  And, to have them do this all with lies and deceit puts the final turn on the knife they have firmly planted into my back.


It should bother you
It hurts more when you've been stabbed in the back by a "friend," because it's a betrayal. And there is the ugly realization that there may be nobody on our side in Washington. The situation is not hopeless. It means we will have to do all the heavy lifting if we really want this. But we have no advocate, when we thought we did.  

[ Parent ]
Of course you feel bad, because you are a good person
It sounds all too familiar, doesn't it?
---------------------------------------------
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

Then they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
I did not protest;
I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out for me.

--Pastor Martin Niemöller


[ Parent ]
Well...
I live in California so technically ENDA has no bearing on my life either.  So fuck ENDA then.

[ Parent ]
What a horsesh*t job to be a queer laison to Obama's administration
I don't envy that position at all.
Any more garbage and they'll have no liason person, at least none we'll listen to.

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small


WAIT = NEVER


What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small


wait = never.............. image
   http://img.villagephotos.com/p...

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small


[ Parent ]
Can anyone tell me why they think that Congress is ready to battle, for instance, Lou Sheldon and his bathroom hysteria propaganda as opposed to the discredited Elaine Donnelly?
I'll bite.  

My guess is it's because they're afraid of the Brass and its intransigence.


"Before the Sun Sets on this Administration", eh?
Do tell...perhaps it may the last act of his only term.

Hate stops a beating heart.

If
most of what we were promised is not there by November of 2011, I won't be voting for Obama in elections (I am a party blank, so I don't vote in primaries; although I may just register to vote against him).

[ Parent ]
This is all a decoy
to permit the administration to get a pass on their announcement on friday of the DOMA action...

We need to keep up the firestorm so that they do not get away with it...

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid


[ Parent ]
I won't be voting for ANYONE in ANY election
The system is rigged.

Elections are fraud.


[ Parent ]
Our elections are purely for show,
like reality TV--full of artificially manufactured "heroes" and villains," and rigged by the producers.  They are designed to create the appearance of democracy, when in fact the US has only one party, the Big Money Party, and both the Democrats and the GOP will do anything necessary to preserve that status quo.  Pesky little items like, oh, constitutional guarantees of equality are mere distractions from their real work.

This is the same exact situation that obtained during the so-called Gilded Age (industry lobbyists writing the bills that "regulate" them, etc.).  It took broad popular outrage to end that.  Where is the outrage now?  People in Iran are rioting because of a rigged election.  When our 200 election was blatantly rigged, Americans...stayed home and watched TV.

The American people, taking one with another, are the most timorous, sniveling, poltroonish, ignominious mob of serfs and goose-steppers ever gathered under one flag in Christendom since the end of the Middle Ages.
-H.L. Mencken


[ Parent ]
*2000, not 200. Obviously. LOL.


The American people, taking one with another, are the most timorous, sniveling, poltroonish, ignominious mob of serfs and goose-steppers ever gathered under one flag in Christendom since the end of the Middle Ages.
-H.L. Mencken


[ Parent ]
while exiting the White House Obama pardons all fags


What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small


I have two comments / questions
How can the administration work to grant federal benefits to LGBTs who are federal employees like they just recently proposed for same-sex couples in the state department while at the same time using the DOJ to claim that DOMA is good law and constitutional?  I'm not clear how providing federal benefits to same-sex couples in the state dept doesn't violate DOMA as described by DOJin the brief.

If hate crimes legislation is passed this eek as suggested by Berry, wouldn't that create a legal "suspect class" for sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression?  And wouldn't that invalidate some of the claims in the brief that no such suspect class legally exists?


Some answers, maybe
I'm not clear how providing federal benefits to same-sex couples in the state dept doesn't violate DOMA as described by DOJin the brief.

Neither am I. For what it is worth, my guess is that the benefits will be offered, not to people who have established some kind of state-recognized domestic partnership or marriage arrangement, but to “any two people” who happen to live together etc. My university did something similar with regard to gym memberships for faculty and staff, and even the virulently anti-gay (now ex-!) Attorney General Bob McDonnell admitted that it did not run afoul of our state’s no-marriages-no-civil-unions-no-benefits-this-means-you constitutional amendment.

If hate crimes legislation is passed this [w]eek as suggested by Berry, wouldn't that create a legal "suspect class" for sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression?

No. I am not a lawyer, but by basic citizen’s understanding of this is that suspect classification is established by courts as part of the process of deciding constitutional claims. A new, friendly law does not create suspect classification, but in fact may make it marginally harder to achieve, since the argument for why a classification should be suspect rests in part upon the idea that animus against the group defined by the classification is so strong and so widespread that the legislature cannot be trusted to act rationally with regard to that group.


[ Parent ]
I can't agree with you
on suspect class here.  The Hate crimes bill is UPDATING the existing hates crimes legislation to ADD sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression to the EXISTING list of suspect classes that are already covered by hate crimes laws.  THos existing classes include race and religion.

By your resoning, race might not be considered a suspect class any longer because they have hate crimes protection.


[ Parent ]
Identification as a protected group in hate crimes law does not establish USSC suspect classification
There are two different things that you are referring to when you speak of “suspect class”.

The first is the list of groups in the hate crimes legislation, such that when a crime is committed because of the victim’s membership in one of these groups, it is considered a hate crime.

The second is the list of groups that, when the U.S. Supreme Court considers a due process or equal protection challenge against the legitimacy of a law that distinguishes between people based on membership in such a group, it applies a higher standard of scrutiny to the government‘s claim that the discrimination is necessary to advance a compelling state interest. (Here is a basic Wikipedia page about this.)

That second list, which is what I thought you meant when you referred to suspect classification in your original post, changes only when the Supreme Court issues a new decision in which they find a group eligible for a level of scrutiny that they had not previously been entitled to.

To quote from Wikipedia a bit (okay, not the best source, but I am lazy; Google around if you don’t buy this):


To be considered a suspect classification in the United States, the statute at issue must target:
  1. a “discrete” or “insular” minority who
  2. possess an immutable trait (race or alienage),
  3. share a history of discrimination, and
  4. are powerless to protect themselves via the political process.

It is that last point that I was referring to in my post. I believe that in one of the briefs filed in the Re: Marriage Cases suit in California (which uses a similar suspect classification doctrine for claims under parallel parts of the California constitution), the claim was made that sexual orientation should not be held to be a suspect classification because gays and lesbians had recently been quite successful in getting measures passed through the California legislature. The court didn‘t buy it.

Note that I said “marginally harder to achieve.” The court considers history, and one instance of queer folk able to obtain relief through the ordinary legislative process doesn’t mean that folk are powerless. It is just one small data point hinting at that, and the court will consider the complete history when making its decision.

Lawyers or other people who know something about constitutional law are invited to jump in here, of course, but I am pretty comfortable with this general analysis.


[ Parent ]
Obama...
Should not feel obligated to take action on any of this stuff until he is done with health care and reinforces the economy. FULL STOP

He should not waste one iota of politicla capital on this until he has addressed the issues that caused most people to vote for him.

Yes, I'm mad at him for not dealing with the whole torture fiasco (though I understand why he's avoiding it like the plague). But things like DOMA are toxic. It will divert desperately needed resources to fight that need to be directed at more important issues.

If anyone is ready to support the GOP because the President has other issues to deal with...so be it. Vote Republican or green or whatever else makes you happy. You won't have too many allies anyway since the rest of the American people will be focused on the larger issues.

I may be a gay American, but DADT and DOMA have no bearing on my life. I'd be perfectly happy with ENDA and the Mat Shepperd Act. They should pass them as soon as politically possible. But they should keep their eye on the ball....HEALTH CARE!. I know that Obama is traveling the country trying to sell the public option to the American people...keep it up! :)

Kevinchi...Obama will be in Chicago today to promote health care. Perhaps you can turn up to the AMA meeting and tell him why he should stop focusing on that issue and focus on DOMA or DADT or whatever else is on tap today.


it's too early in the morning for house faggots
Thing is Obama took action on "that stuff" and degraded and humiliated an entire community unnecessarily in doing so.

SciFi Geek , with all due respect, don't reply to this. You just worked my motherfuc*ing dandruff up again.

 


[ Parent ]
Correction...
Kev, you were right to correct my reference to John Berry as a Porch Faggot. He's obviously been promoted to House Faggot; Head House Faggot, in fact.

But The Geek has repeatedly testified as a mere Field Faggot from the Obama Plantation.

And, as usual, he's not being entirely truthful.

It's MENTAL health care he's actually concerned about.


[ Parent ]
He's not a Field Faggot
More like a Slug Faggot from the same plantation.

[ Parent ]
If you're
"worked up," might I suggest that you try calming down. More logic and reason and less emotion will win the day. The fact of the matter is that people are WAY too worked up about too many things at once. That is a serious problem.

If the "community" were more organized it would pick a SINGLE issue that is reasonably achieveable, and then push our congress critters to make it happen. As it stands people are flinging stuff randomly and hoping that something sticks. This community lacks focus and the ability to prioritize.

The alleged plan by HRC is a good one. Push hard and focus on hate crimes and ENDA. It impacts the most people and has a reasonable chance of passing. If we were seriously focused on those two issues, they would probably get passed a lot quicker. DOMA is a third rail of politics and no one is going to take any immediate action. Having the leading LGBT organizations demand action on it NOW just fantasy.


[ Parent ]
I asked you not reply to me
And I won't repeat it again. Seriously.

I've tried to be a voice of calm admidst a community that is still stinging from this piece of shit DOJ brief by the HNIC.


[ Parent ]
did you make this same argument
when Obama wasted time time on federal funding for stem cell research?  How about the Lilly Ledbetter act?  There is quite a long list of things Obama has spent time on that are not related in any way to healthcare and the economy.

Do you also understand that public support for the repeal of DADT is at 69%.  And public support for hate crimes legislation and ENDA are even higher than that.

Obama would not risk ANY "iota" of political capital in providing his "fierce advocacy" to advance these issues.

Obama and the administration are perfectly capable of working on healthcare, the economy and other issues at the same time.


[ Parent ]
The Ledbetter Act...
Is a bad example because it was done EXACTLY the way the President advocates...though Congress. If congress passes legislation on ANY of this, it will get signed.

[ Parent ]
and, if I took your attitude
I would be demanding that Obama not spend any captial on the economy or healthcare.

I already have insurance.  I'm retired from a good job and have adequate money to live on.  I'm just now refinancing my mortgage to 4.5% which will save me even more money.

As long as the economy stay in the crapper, it works out better for me personally because all the merhcants have to keep lowering prices and having HUGE sales to try to stay in business.

Luckily, I don't subscribe to the "what's in it for only me" attitude that you have.  


[ Parent ]
Oh, get a fucking clue
Self-loathing idiots like you are part of the larger problem. Please take your "toxic waste" elsewhere, no self-respecting gay person will buy it.  

[ Parent ]
Exactly how clueless are you?
Obama spits in your face and you politely ask him for a towel.  And when he hands you a sheet of sandpaper instead, you still defend him.

If Obama is too busy to take on DOMA, could you please explain how he found the time to formulate a policy for defending it?

Despite your handle, you are not a geek.  You are a dumbfuck, period.  It isn't my usual style to insult people so blatantly, but I'm sick to goddamn death of halfwit collaborationists like you.

The American people, taking one with another, are the most timorous, sniveling, poltroonish, ignominious mob of serfs and goose-steppers ever gathered under one flag in Christendom since the end of the Middle Ages.
-H.L. Mencken


[ Parent ]
Welcome to the "sick to goddamn death" fold, Q.


[ Parent ]
You sound more...
like a Republican every day. Everything is black or white. You're either with me or against me. Keep it up and you'll be about as successful as Bush.

MY face was not personally spat in since this was NOT my issue nor was it a reason that I voted for the President. As I've said before, I'm far more interested in the critical issues that impact all Americans.

The DOMA defense has been done 3 times now and is independently crafted by the DOJ. More importantly though, I have NO PROBLEM with the Executive branch enforcing and defending the laws as they exist on the books. I'm less updet with them defending DOMA (as they should) than I am about them not enforcing the laws on torture (which they should be just as vigilant in defending). Again, I NEVER want a situation where the government can simply decide to ignore the law. If you oppose the law, spend time lobbying congress to change it.


[ Parent ]
So the dignity of gay relationships is not your issue?
Being called a child rapist is not your issue?  Having the administration argue that LGBT people are not entitled to the same legal protections as other minorities is not your issue?  Nice of you to admit where you're coming from.

At least half of your screen name is correct.  You are obviously living in a science fiction universe.  Oh--so I guess that's your issue.  Worrying about whether Evil Mutants from Metaluna will conquer Earth.  Like, something really important, right?

The American people, taking one with another, are the most timorous, sniveling, poltroonish, ignominious mob of serfs and goose-steppers ever gathered under one flag in Christendom since the end of the Middle Ages.
-H.L. Mencken


[ Parent ]
No...
The "dignity of gay relationships" is not an issue I'm overly concerned with. I personally could not care less what the American people or the government thinks about gay relationships. My primary concerns as far as the LGBT "community" is concerned is ensuring that people enjoy the same basic rights that folks in the gay meccas have long forgotten about.

But then again why am I even responding to you. Your idea of civil discourse to to fall back on childish name calling.  


[ Parent ]
Oh, see
Those "gay meccas" weren't always "gay meccas," the white gay community worked their asses off with, yes, some political contacts to make them what they were. And now the straights seem to want Boystown back nowadays.

Give them some credit where credit is due. And you know damn well that even in those "gay meccas" many of them are pooling resources (4 and 5 to a condo at times and what not)
to live out a fantasy

Sure the gay community is racist and classist but the straight community is also homophobic; so much so they we felt the need to create "gay ghettos."

By and large, though, that wasn't something that was given to them.

Myself, I have very little interest in working with any other community, by and large. As far as LGBTs of color, they get all of the support that I can give them.

But just because the social inequality can't be measured exactly in economic terms doesn't mean that the social and legal inequality does not hurt the community.  


[ Parent ]
this was my argument last week--until the DOMA brief on 6/12
Buddy, this was my view until last Friday.  I thought we just needed patience and perspective.  I thought, "Yeah, it'll come.  He promised.  He gets it."  But we were just betrayed, attacked, and endangered by the Obama administration, and I have jumped ship.

Allies can advocate for our issues.  They can work for our issues.  Or, happy day, they can both advocate and work for our issues.

When an "ally" becomes silent on our issues, they are no longer an ally.

When someone actually speaks against us, or worse, works against us, or worst, both speaks and works against us, they become an enemy.

The DOJ DOMA motion was both speech and action against us.  It gave credence and fuel to the hatemongers who would rejoice to see us annihilated.  It endangered my life and yours in this climate where right-wing reactionaries feel so threatened that they are willing to lash out and kill, as happened to Dr. Tiller at his clinic and Officer Johns at the Holocaust Memorial Museum.

Obama has been all over the map on LGBT issues, but Friday's brief was a new and profound low point, and to my mind, the least common denominator.  I cannot support anyone who would demean my humanity, continue to deny us our civil rights, and put me and our whole tribe in physical danger.  

Unless Obama gets the message that this is unacceptable, then we can expect to continue to be treated like this, and worse.  This weekend I was thinking, "Yeah, but I'll still support him on health care reform, because universal health care is very much an LGBT issue."  But now I'm not even sure about that.  Sending out his lackey to tell us

We ought not waste energy and angst attacking him ...
was adding insult to injury.  Our righteous fury at being betrayed and attacked and endangered is "angst"?

To fix this, Obama must 1) withdraw the motion, 2) repudiate it, 3) accept the resignation of the amoeba who wrote it, and 4) file a new motion ennumerating the various ways that DOMA is unconstitutional and why it should be repealed by Congress or overturned by SCOTUS.  Even then, he will be on probation indefinitely.


[ Parent ]
You might as well...
committ to being angry then because there is NO WAY that they are going to argue against the law since that is NOT the job of the DOJ. Secondly, you can dislike DOMA and still consider it Constitutional. There are plenty of arguments for and against its constitutionality. Again, Obama does not have to believe that its unconstitutional for him to be in opposition to the law. Unless he has stated otherwise, you don't know if he finds the law unconstitutional.

Besides, there is no way that this government is going near DOMA of its own choice anytime soon. Most of their legal actions of late have been trying to keep these cases away from the SCOTUS precisely because they don't want to defend the policies in court.

One other point about the flap over this brief, aren't these the very arguments used to pass DOMA in the first place? As unsavory as they may be, aren't those arguments the very basis for the act's existance? On some level, the brief points out the dubious foundation on which the law was built.


[ Parent ]
The best reaction to Obama's administration saying we need talk to Congress
When Obama want's fundraising, volunteers, and votes...again.

Simply say,"to someone else....too."

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small


deleted the word talk as comment was loading....opps
"talk to someone else ...too

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small


[ Parent ]
If you are not
working to pressure Congress, then you don't have much of a reason to be upset. Its Congress that is in charge of making the laws, its their job to change them.

People spend WAY too much time focusing on the President when it is Congress that has the bulk of the power on these issues. But I suppose its easier to complain about a distant President than it is to pressure your own representatives.


[ Parent ]
clever sidebar
John Aravosis over at americablog.com has a rather interesting comment on how DOMA may complicate Berry/Obama's benefits grant to Federal employees.

Now, sure, I've been told by big gay lawyers that DOMA wouldn't necessarily ban the provision of federal benefits to partners provided they're not in a marriage-like relationship - meaning, DOMA would ban you from getting benefits if you have a civil union or an actual marriage in one of the states that permit it. So what that means is that should Obama decide to give benefits to the partners of gay federal employees, he may have to exclude any federal employees who have civil unions or marriages (in places like Massachusetts, CA, IA, CT, etc). Why? Because he hasn't done anything on DOMA, like he promised. Oops.

http://www.americablog.com/200...

One step forward, two steps back, stumble.


The federal...
policy would not need to reference gender at all. It can act in the same way that DP benefits work irregardless of marital status.

Furthermore, as a Federal policy, DOMA would superceede and state law with regard to the operations of the Federal government. Thus as far as the Federal government is concerned, they are not married and thus eligible for DP benefits.


[ Parent ]
be that as it may
The way I read DOMA -- see link -- is that the Federal gov't cannot recognize a same-sex relationship as marriage or the equivalent. I gather from your comment that they can recognize any two people, however, provided they aren't married.

Swell. So any two adults (or, maybe, on a showing that they live together) get Federal benefits, which could create some interesting claims disputes at OPM. (How do you certify a relationship that isn't a marriage? Sign an affidavit saying that A and B are boyfriend/girlfriend [check the box] or what?) So our commitments get treated as just another cohabitation, or maybe not even that. We have the right to cohabitate, but not form a legal household. I still see a Federal insult in this.

And just what happens if the beneficiaries' state decides this is taxable? All that DOMA requires of the states is that they don't HAVE to recognize other states' marriages, not decide that this is some kind of extra gratuity.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.go...


[ Parent ]
Do you see...
Swell. So any two adults (or, maybe, on a showing that they live together) get Federal benefits, which could create some interesting claims disputes at OPM. (How do you certify a relationship that isn't a marriage? Sign an affidavit saying that A and B are boyfriend/girlfriend [check the box] or what?) So our commitments get treated as just another cohabitation, or maybe not even that. We have the right to cohabitate, but not form a legal household. I still see a Federal insult in this.

"an insult" when corporations or state governments confer DP benefits on couples now?

The point of all of this is to get federal civil servants access to the benefits currently denied them. Who cares if its done in a way that's merely based on cohabitation? The emotional part is ultimately irrelevant.  


[ Parent ]
apples and oranges
No I don't see how "corporations or state governments confer DP benefits on couples" is comparable. Corporations don't have the capability of pronouncing a relationship as legal, though it does help them determine eligibility if the partners have at least a DP registry, which the Feds don't confer. Same if a state gov't confers DP benefits on their employees, if that was what you meant.

Nor is it helpful if a state can't or won't determine if an out-of-state DP or marriage is valid in their territory, thanks to the state-recognition clause in DOMA.

It's cheesy for the Administration to try and confer some benefits but not dignify it with any legal recognition, which under DOMA the OPM can't do -- and, worse yet, confer limited benefits that are less than those of conventionally-married couples.

See?


[ Parent ]
I'm not done with elections or voting
but I'm JUST getting started in going back to civil disobedience and marches.

and I'm not feeling the LEAST bit CIVIL.

What have you done today, to make ya feel PROUD?


~Heather Small


Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Report TOS Violations



Join the Blend Chat Room



Premium Sponsors



BlogAds






Search the Blend
Current site


PHB 2.0 Web
Search Blend 1.0 Archives
Ad Networks


BlogSheroes BlogAds


Miscellany

RSS Feeds

Subscribe with Bloglines

Visit NCBlogs


frontpage hit counter

Stats

Powered by: SoapBlox