BuggBlog

Harry Reid doesn't care about you, so why should you care about him?

This hasn't been a really good week for someone like me, an early and eager gay supporter of Barack Obama. My patience had already been stretched thin by the hemming and hawing on repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," and was pretty much broken by the administration's surprisingly zealous brief in defending the (indefensible) Defense of Marriage Act. Beccaue nothing says "Change you can believe in" like "Your marriage is morally equivalent to incest."

Oh, yay.

I was backstage when OPM head John Berry gave his speech at Sunday's Capital Pride festival, and listening to him speak was simultaneously energizing and depressing. Energizing because Berry is  an even better federal-level representative than Bob Hattoy (bless his soul) was during the Clinton years; depressing because he spouted a defense of the Obama DOJ's execrable brief in support of DOMA. Yes, I get the argument that the leader of the executive branch of government may sometimes be compelled to defend laws passed by the legislative branch that it may not agree with. But this idea that Obama's people are trying to force down our throats -- that for Obama's Department of Justice to do anything but write the most egregiously homophobic brief possible would have been a violation of their sacred constitutional duty -- is simply mindbogglingly stupid and offensive. A part of me feels sorry for Berry having to mouth the words; another part of me is angry with him for playing along with the script.

If nothing else, the backlash from the LGBT community over the DOMA brief may have acheived the seemingly impossible task of waking the Obama administration to the fact that, hey, there are a lot of homosexuals out here who took you at your word and expected you to actually DO something other than sending out your press secretary to stumble over the most basic of questions about our rights as U.S. citizens. In his speech at Captial Pride, Berry promised some big action beyond hate crimes on our issues, soon. If that comes through in some tangible way, then I'll be back in the fold (as I've said before, with the American re-discovery of such basic concepts as diplomacy and rational regulation of the economy, I'm feeling good about Obama on just about everything non-LGBT related -- you know, everything other than my basic humanity). 

But, Democrats being what they are, someone has to rush in and stamp down the tender shoots of optimism that had begun to sprout in my cynical worldview. Or, less loquaciously, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid decided to be a fucking ass on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell":

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid speaking at a press conference Monday said he has no plans to introduce a bill to repeal "don't ask, don't tell" in the Senate.

"I haven't identified any sponsors," he said. "My hope is that it can be done administratively."

A Democratic aide later clarified that Reid was speaking about the possibility of using an executive order to suspend discharges or perhaps halting enforcement of the policy by changing departmental regulations within the Department of Defense.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs has continually said in recent months that President Barack Obama believes the only "durable solution" to repealing the military's gay ban would be to do so through legislative action.

Senator Reid also indicated that he is waiting on the House of Representatives to take action on the bill that was introduced there in March.

"If the House moves on this," he said, "I would be happy to take it up."

(Thanks to Kerry Eleveld for this one.)

I have been angry -- and rightfully so -- at Obama over the past few weeks. I'm even angrier at this idiocy from Reid. Seventy percent -- more than two-thirds -- of Americans support repealing DADT. A majority of freaking evangelicals support repealing DADT, for god's sake, but Reid wants to pussyfoot around it like it's a radioactive turd from Chernobyl?

If Harry Reid and, frankly, Nancy Pelosi, are the best options that Democrats have to offer us as gays and lesbians at this point, then it's time to turn off the financial spigot. You may not have the option or desire to support an Republican alternative, but if the best Reid, et al, can offer us on LGBT issues is cowardice, then at least let us offer apathy in return.

With DOMA defense, Obama administration still finding wounds to pour salt in

During the past few days I've talked to a number of people about the recent rumblings in the gay community about President Obama and the appearance of the administration backing away from such campaign promises as repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Obviously, I'm among those early Obama supporters who've neared the point of abject frustration -- having lived through the early elation and later deflation of the Clinton years, I'm inclined to see warning signs where others may choose to give the benefit of the doubt.

During a chat with a political pragmatist who works on the Hill, I mentioned some version of Jonathan Capeheart's call for Obama to make a speech on GLBT issues in order reassure the community that we're not about to be abandoned on some altar of political expediency. The pragmatist asked me what, really, that would accomplish, given that little will change the order of GLBT-related legislation that will be moving through congress, namely: Hate Crimes, followed by ENDA, followed by DADT, followed by (maybe) DOMA.

At the time, I thought it would accomplish quite a bit, both for the gay community -- being reassured in a tangible way through a speech followed by some sort of action (say, a stop-loss order, or even a challenge to Congress) -- and for Obama, who would benefit from fewer distractions if his administration would stop needlessly provoking one of his party's more entrenched constituencies. This was after we learned of the admnistration's brief to the Supreme Court urging the dismissal of a DADT lawsuit, promoting the idea that DADT is "rationally related to the government's legitimate interest in military discipline and cohesion," language right out of the right-wing, anti-gay playbook.

When I inquired at the White House about this appropriation of anti-gay slogans in an admninistration brief, I got the depressingly non-specific yet lengthy sentence from a spokesperson: "The President has said that he wants to see Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repealed in a sensible way that strengthens our armed forces and our national security.  Doing so will ensure that all who are committed to serving our country are able to serve."

That's a long way from the beginning of the year when press secretary Robert Gibbs, asked whether Obama would repeal DADT, simply said, "Yes."

Then came today and the news that Obama's Department of Justice contributed an unexpectedly full-throated defense of the Defense of Marriage Act in yet another court brief in response to a suit challenging the law. If you're interested in an entire breakdown of the brief -- and an evisceration of the idea that the DOJ is somehow obligated to defend the indefensible -- check out the full post at AmericaBlog. The long and the short of it is that, once more, the Obama administration has gone out of its way to use language that has been deployed against us for years by anti-gay forces, in support of legislation that demeans us all as second-class citizens.

Andrew Sullivan, among others, likes to talk about Obama's tendency to play "long ball" -- to be looking ahead three, four, even five steps in the political game at hand. It's certainly possible that that is what he's doing here: staying low, nurturing his role as commander-in-chief and earning the support and trust of the military leadership, one of the nation's last bastions of explicit homophobia. That, I would understand.

What I don't understand, and what undercuts the idea that some long-ball game is being played here, is the weeks long fumbling of any and all questions about DADT. It began, really, with Defense Secretary Robert Gates answering the DADT question with the excuse, they "have a lot on our plates right now," and excuse that's been repeated with disturbing regularity in the days and weeks since. Even leaving aside the ludicrous nature of such an excuse from a president that built his fortunes on the slogan "Yes We Can," the "we're too busy to think about people like you right now" is no less than salt in a festering wound. It might be an easier excuse to believe if I didn't keep seeing things like Obama taping a comedy bit for Stephen Colbert's show.

This snowball of ridiculousness keeps rolling down the hill, and the only person now who can put a stop to it is Obama himself, whether through a speech, an appearance or a specific and targeted action that would demostrably make a difference in moving toward equality for all GLBT Americans. If not, then at some point we're not going to have much choice other than to believe the worst, no matter how much we've been hoping for the best.

"The State of Marriage Equality" townhall forum tonight

With the ever-increasing prominence of marriage equality for gays and lesbians in the news, along with all the other issues our community faces as well, I'm guessing that we're going to have a lot to talk about at tonight's town hall meeting, "The State of Marriage Equality" at the HRC Equality Forum (1640 Rhode Island Ave. NW). I'll be moderating the panel that includes: Diego Sanchez, Legislative Adviser to Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.); Michael Crawford, DC for Marriage; and Sarah Warbelow, Human Rights Campaign.

The forum runs from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. and, given the increasing number of GLBT-related stories in the news right now, including the Obama administration's approach on DADT and the implications of the Sotomayor pick for Supreme Court, I imagine we'll be fitting a lot of discussion in for the evening. I will come prepared with my moderator's whip.

Holding Obama accountable on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

Pam Spaulding takes on the progressive/liberal Obama supporters who want gays and lesbians to just shut up already about the president's lack of follow-through on his unequivocal campaign promise to end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell":

With 70% of public support behind repeal, he has done nothing to 1) push this policy with the jellyfish on the Hill with the bully pulpit or 2) sign an executive order to stop the discharges while Congress sorts out the legislative angle. This administration claims it's helpless to do anything, yet doesn't ask for a review of the legality of President's power to use a stop-loss order for this purpose. Should we not ask these questions? Candidate Obama criticized John McCain for having an inability to multi-task. Apparently it's ok with some progressives that President Obama can't handle discussion of LGBT policy and, oh, say health care. Pointing out the President's inability to lead in any respect on LGBT issues makes is clearly pissing some of our progressive "friends" off. We're making him take the eye off of the ball. Sorry, I didn't know basic civil rights is a back burner issue. I'll come back later.

There were people who were eager to declare the Obama administration an abject failure from about the moment he invited Rick Warren to give his inaugural invocation. That was a bit much. This, however, is following up on an explicit pledge from the president on a political issue that enjoys extremely broad public support. We are perfectly justified in raising our concerns early and often because, as past experience has taught us, to many of our so-called friends are always eager to push gay issues aside in the name of pragmatism. Ana Marie Cox gets this point; one would think that the liberal/progressive political activists shushing people would get it as well.

Don't forget that candidate Obama mocked John McCain for not being able to multi-task, yet now that he's in charge of the vast Leviathan that is the federal government we're too believe that DADT is the straw that would break the camel's back when it comes to the administration's workload. He was right to mock McCain then; we're right to hold Obama accountable now.